[besserweis]

Es ist ja schon verblüffend, das langsam darüber nachgedacht wird, ob sich eine Epoche langsam dem Ende nähert. Es ist aber immer wie mit den Trends an den Börsen. Meistens dauert alles etwas länger als man sich das Vorgestellt hat.

Die Folge ist, ein System was auf Wachstum basiert, wird nicht morgen und nicht übermorgen als überholt gelten und durch etwas neues ersetzt.
Im Moment wie es ja hier schon beschrieben wurde beißt sich die Theorie vom immerwährenden Wachstum in den Schwanz.
Jeder der mal sein Abi gemacht hat und in der Mathematik sich mit Waschstumsfunktionen und Differentialgleichungen aus ein ander gesetzt hat müsste noch in Erinnerung haben, dass wir in der Natur ehr mit beschränktem Wachstum zu tun haben. Wenn wir jetzt diese Kurven die z.B. in der Natur vorkommen mit dem was wir machen beschreiben, so denke ich, stehen wir noch weit weit weg von der oberen Schranke des Wachstums auf Erde und dem was der Mensch so erreichen kann. Allerdings lässt sich einfach nicht genau sagen wie weit wir wirklich noch weg sind. Verkehrt wäre es sicher nicht jetzt diese Wahrheiten zu kommunizieren und darüber nachzudenken wie das Leben für die Menschheit aussehen soll wenn sich die Wachstumsfieberkurve Ihrer Oberene Schranke nähert und mit welchen Mitteln wir dieses Leben lebenswert gestalten.
Fazit:
Das lineares oder exponentierlles Wachstum auf der Erde nur innerhalb gewisser Schranken möglich ist, ist fast jedem klar(hoffe ich zumindest) oder kann jedem Plausibel gemacht werden. Das Problem liegt meiner Meinung nach wo anders:
Einzuodnen wo wir stehen.

Im Bereich Dow könnte ich mir mittlerweile vorstellen, das wir in nächster Zeit wieder eine kräftige technische Gegenreaktion sehen werden, was aber nicht heißt das wir Mitte des Jahres wieder neue Tiefs testen und machen werden.... Mein Zeithorizont ist, unter berücksichtigung der Zahlen, die die Unternehmen zur Zeit veröffentlichen, 2013 könnte sich das Bild erhellen und das eine oder andere Leck in unserem System geflickt sein...Bis ca. 2035 haben wir die Lecks nicht nur geflickt sondern ein neues Boot gebaut oder verherende Kriege geführt.

Nur so mein Senf....

Gruß
bw

[LordLangzahn]

U.K. to insure up to $353 billion in Lloyds assets

Lloyds Banking Group PLC and the British government have agreed to a deal where the government will insure more than $353 billion in Lloyd assets and increase its stake in the bank by up to 75%, The Wall Street Journal reported late Friday on its Web site. The deal is part of a larger government plan to require banks to take a "first loss" on bad assets before the insurance kicks in, according to the Journal.

Und Zack, die nächste Großbank mit dem Staat als Mehrheitsanteilseigner.

[LongTrader]

World Bank Says Global Economy Will Shrink in ’09

the World Bank also predicted that the global economy would shrink in 2009 for the first time since World War II. The bank did not provide a specific estimate, but bank officials said its economists would be publishing one in the next several weeks.

The World Bank also warned that global trade would shrink for the first time since 1982, and that the decline would be the biggest since the 1930s.

It warned that the financial disruptions are all but certain to overwhelm the ability of institutions like itself and the International Monetary Fund to provide a buffer.

The bank said that developing countries, many of which had been growing rapidly in recent years, are being devastated by plunging exports, falling commodity prices, declining foreign investment and vanishing credit.

[Green]

nachtrag noch zum freitag:

VIX action unverändert. weiterhin keinerlei gesteigerte angst oder gar panik zu beobachten.



mixed stuff:

etwas klarheit, wer die AIG milliarden erhalten hat (siehe dazu auch Barry)

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...5Cs&refer=home

...

Bailout Beneficiaries

New York Insurance Superintendent Eric Dinallo said at a March 5 hearing he’d received the presentation.

The document doesn’t say which other companies have benefited from AIG’s repeated rescues. Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Deutsche Bank AG were among at least two dozen financial institutions that were paid $50 billion from the bailout funds received by AIG, the Wall Street Journal reported, citing a confidential document and people familiar with the matter whom it didn’t identify.

Goldman and Deutsche got about $6 billion each between September and December, the Journal said. Merrill Lynch & Co., Societe Generale SA, Morgan Stanley, Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc and HSBC Holdings Plc were other counterparties that also received payments, the newspaper said, citing the document...




Pimco's El-Erian: Profitable Firms Cutting Jobs

..."The situation is getting worse, not better," El-Erian told Reuters Television Friday. "Unemployment numbers are usually viewed as backward-looking. What today's number tells you is forward-looking. It tells you that even the profitable firms are shedding labor today in order to position themselves for a more difficult outcome."

... Furthermore, what the United States is experiencing will spread to the rest of the world in the next few months, he said. "As such, the spike in the U.S. unemployment number is a forward-looking indicator of what we shall see in many other countries."



Quiet Layoffs Sting Workers Without Notice


sehr interessant: A graphical look at hedge fund leverage


Wertpapierkredite schrumpfen mit zunehmender Geschwindigkeit

[Green]

der wind dreht sich langsam.

letzte woche bei GM, die sich langsam aber sicher nun doch auf chapter 11 vorbereiten.


und nun auch bei den banken.
Shelby, McCain und Hoenig (kansas fed) sind nun auch für verstaatlichung, wenn nötig.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29583645

US Should Let Some Big Banks Go: Republicans

The United States should let some big troubled banks fail rather than commit more federal funds to prop them up, two key congressional Republicans said Sunday.

Senator Richard Shelby, top Republican on the banking committee, said the United States should not mimic Japan, which in the 1990s propped up failing banks and prolonged its economic downturn.

"Close them down, get them out of business. If they're dead, they ought to be buried," Shelby told ABC's "This Week" program. "We bury the small banks. We've got to bury some big ones and send a strong message to the market."

Financial authorities have been under increasing fire as hundreds of billions of dollars of loans and capital infusions into distressed institutions have failed to halt the economic downturn, which has only accelerated in recent weeks.

Senator John McCain, who remains a Republican leader after losing the 2008 White House race to President Barack Obama, criticized the new administration's response to the banks.

"I don't think they made the hard decision and that is to let these banks fail," McCain told "Fox News Sunday." As the U.S. government boosts its stakes in major banks such as Citigroup [C], talk of nationalization has stirred a debate over how far regulators will go to help the ailing financial system.

Shelby did not mention any banks by name but, when asked about Citigroup, he said: "Citi's always been a problem child."

McCain echoed Shelby's criticism of U.S. banks but both senators avoided the term "nationalization" -- a concept typically derided by Republicans as a move toward socialism. Asked what should be done, McCain said: "You'd sell off their assets and you have the -- unfortunately, the shareholders and others will take a beating."

Tom Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's biggest business group, said it was "not practical to talk about closing a bank that is integrated throughout the whole global economy." "It is practical to talk about buying some of those assets away from those banks and holding them in an institution that would have both public and private money," Donohue said on ABC's "This Week."

On Friday, Kansas City Federal Reserve President Thomas Hoenig criticized as piecemeal the approach taken by the government in handling of the banking upheaval.

"We understandably would prefer not to 'nationalize' these businesses but, reacting as we are, we nevertheless are drifting into a situation where institutions are being nationalized piecemeal with no resolution of the crisis," Hoenig said in remarks to a local group.

...



http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...ow/4243798.cms via http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/

$50 trillion wiped off world financial assets: ADB

9 Mar 2009, 1022 hrs IST,
ET Bureau

MANILA: The global crisis wiped a staggering $50 trillion off the value of financial assets last year including $9.6 trillion of losses in developing Asia alone, the Asian Development Bank said Monday.

``This is by far the most serious crisis to hit the world economy since the Great Depression,'' said ADB President Haruhiko Kuroda. But he predicted Asia would be ``one of the first regions to emerge from it.''

In a study commissioned by the Manila-based lender on the impact of the financial crisis on emerging economies, it estimated the value of financial assets worldwide, currency, equity and bond markets, to have dropped by $50 trillion in 2008.

It said developing Asia was hit harder, losing the equivalent of just over one year's worth of gross domestic product, than other emerging economies because the region has expanded much more rapidly.

In Latin America, losses were estimated at $2.1 trillion. According to the study, the figures provide clear proof of the close connections between markets and economies around the world, leaving few, if any, countries immune to financial or economic fallout. A recovery can only now be envisaged for late 2009 or early 2010, it said.

A sprawling region, developing Asia includes 44 economies from the central Asian republics to China to the Pacific islands. The bank had earlier projected the region's growth to slow to 5.8 percent this year from an estimated 6.9 percent last year.

The worldwide downturn has hit export-driven economies particularly hard. From South Korea to Taiwan to Singapore, exports have plunged by double digits in recent months as American and European consumers spent less on cars and gadgets....


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...y-1639413.html via http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/

Run on UK sees foreign investors pull $1 trillion out of the City

By Sean O'Grady, Economics correspondent
Saturday, 7 March 2009

Banking crisis undermines Britain's reputation as a safe place to hold funds

A silent $1 trillion "Run on Britain" by foreign investors was revealed yesterday in the latest statistical releases from the Bank of England. The external liabilities of banks operating in the UK – that is monies held in the UK on behalf of foreign investors – fell by $1 trillion (£700bn) between the spring and the end of 2008, representing a huge loss of funds and of confidence in the City of London.

Some $597.5bn was lost to the banks in the last quarter of last year alone, after a modest positive inflow in the summer, but a massive $682.5bn hemorrhaged in the second quarter of 2008 – a record. About 15 per cent of the monies held by foreigners in the UK were withdrawn over the period, leaving about $6 trillion. This is by far the largest withdrawal of foreign funds from the UK in recent decades – about 10 times what might flow out during a "normal" quarter.

The revelation will fuel fears that the UK's reputation as a safe place to hold funds is being fatally compromised by the acute crisis in the banking system and a general trend to financial protectionism internationally.

This week, Lloyds became the latest bank to approach the Government for more assistance. A deal was agreed last night for the Government to insure about £260bn of assets in return for a stake of up to 75 per cent in the bank. The slide in sterling – it has shed a quarter of its value since mid-2007 – has been both cause and effect of the run on London, seemingly becoming a self-fulfilling phenomenon. The danger is that the heavy depreciation of the pound could become a rout if confidence completely evaporates....



http://www.cnbc.com/id/29549920

Stocks Could Skyrocket After March 12th

Investors such as Jon Najarian are hopeful that stocks could soar next week. They say we could see an explosion to the upside after a meeting scheduled for March 12th.

On that date, a House financial services subcommittee plans a hearing on mark-to-market accounting rules, which have been blamed for forcing banks to report billions of dollars in write-downs.

Karen Finerman has long been an advocate of putting these rules on hiatus for a while and “letting the banks breathe.”

If that meeting results in the government relaxing mark-to-market rules, optionMonster Jon Najarian thinks the stock market could explode. On Wednesday he told us, “if the government relaxes mark-to-market for 12 to 18 months you could see financials move 100% in a matter of hours.”

And he went on to say, “In fact, I hope you’ll replay the soundbite because if the government relaxes mark-to-market accounting a number of banks stocks will be unbelievable values at these levels.”... :


...selten so gelacht. der aktienmarkt wird seine erinnerungen löschen und ab sofort eine neue realität akzeptieren.
aber zuzutrauen ist den politikern alles, hat ja schliesslich mit dem shorting ban schon so fein funktioniert.




nochmal zum FDIC problem: chart via http://jessescrossroadscafe.blogspot.com/

würden dies charts in umlauf kommen, wäre ein bank run fast vroprogrammiert:

[KISS]

weiss jemand, warum europa keine eigene ratingagentur hat?

es gibt nämlich unter bekannten bankern die meinung, dass die USA europa nachhaltig schädigen will, (auch neid auf osteuropa) um von eigenen problemen ablenken zu können.
so halten sie auch den dollar und ihre gläubiger stabil und der euro kann unter druck kommen.
clintons reise nach asien zeigt auch, dass den amis europa egal ist.
wir sind ein spielball geworden!!

das ist ja zum schreien, wir haben keine ratingagenturen, kein satelliten navigationssystem und kein eigenes militär! bei letzteren beiden sind die gründe klar, aber bei der ratingagentur, welche eine unglaubliche macht haben, ist das unverständlich und fahrlässig.

k.i.s.s.

[Green]

gute und berechtigte frage.

ich weiss auch nicht genau warum, kann nur mutmassen.

bis zur einführung des euro und der gründung der ezb hat jedes land sein eigenes süppchen gekocht.

man hätte sich niemals auf eine paneuropäische ratingagentur einigen können.

(siehe auch den trouble, den es um sitz und leitung der ezb gab)

für eine rein deutsche oder rein französische RA wäre der markt viel zu klein gewesen. UK macht sowieso sein eigenes ding.
ausländische unternehmen hätten wohl das gleiche argument angebracht wie wir jetzt mit den usa - keine neutralität und evtl. schädigung der eignen wirtschaft.

tja und nach der euro einführung hatte man wichtigeres zu tun (eu erweitern, verfassung, harmonisierung der gesetze etc.) und hat dabei schlichtweg gepennt.

ich denke, früher oder später wäre schon was in der richtung gekommen, aber leider war die kreditkrise schneller.

dass die rating gangster aus den usa aber noch niemand vor gericht gezerrt hat und ihr wort weiter bedeutung hat, ist für mich einer der skandale überhaupt.

[Green]

Zitat von Green

http://www.businessinsider.com/bank-...re-lies-2009-3

Bank of America Admits Its Asset Values Are Lies (BAC)

John Carney|Mar. 2, 2009, 7:53 AM|19

Investors looking at the assets on Bank of America’s balance sheet got a good estimate of how much they are worth on Friday. Unfortunately, that estimate came coupled with an astonishingly frank admission from the bank that the bank continues to insist its loans will perform far better than the market expects.

On Friday, Bank of America filed its annual report witht the Securities and Exchange Commission. The bank admitted that it is carrying loans on its balance sheet marked at more than $44 billion above their fair value.T he bank said it ended 2008 with what it is calling $886.2 billion in loans. But estimated the mark-to-market pricing for these loans is just $841.6 billion.

How can Bank of America get away with this rose-colored view of its assets? It says it plans to hold these loans to maturity, and it expects the ultimate pay off of these loans to be far higher than the market pricing would imply.

Why are we only finding this out now, two months after the worst year in credit market history began? Well, legally, banks are only required to disclose to investors the difference between the market values and the balance sheet values once a year. This is one of the primary reasons that no one trusts banks when attempt to offer assurance by saying they are "well capitalized." All last year, Bank of America knew it was carrying assets at tens of billions of dollars above their market value but refused to tell anyone about this until now.

And people wonder why investors are so distrustful of bank balance sheets.

nochmal schön erklärt:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...cgw&refer=home

Wells Fargo, BofA Loan Values Are a Scary Sight

...Perhaps never before have so many banks’ balance sheets been so patently full of hot air. Bank of America Corp. last week disclosed that its loans at the end of 2008 were worth $44.6 billion less than what its balance sheet said. Wells Fargo & Co. said its loans were worth $14.2 billion less than their book value. The spread at SunTrust Banks Inc. was $13.7 billion.

Keep in mind: These are the banks’ own numbers. If there’s any bias in them, it’s bound to be on the side of optimism.

Those gaps underscore how investors may be placing too much faith in a metric called tangible common equity when evaluating banks’ financial strength and their ability to cope with losses. This measure is supposed to give a bare-bones look at a company’s net worth. The problem is that the figures in the calculation come straight from banks’ balance sheets, which often bear little resemblance to reality.

Loans, for instance, typically are carried at historical cost, reduced only by management’s estimate of how much money the bank will lose on the loans it has made. Meanwhile, market values for many loans have tanked, along with the collateral backing them (if any), as more borrowers miss their payments and investors worry that the banks’ loss forecasts are too low.

Fortunately, all companies once a year are required to disclose estimated fair market values for all their financial instruments, including loans. The footnote disclosures give outsiders the means to get a better look at banks’ balance sheets, using more relevant numbers.

Capital Benchmark

Tangible common equity has become the capital benchmark of choice for investors because the government’s main capital measure, known as Tier 1, has lost credibility. Under Tier 1, banks get to pretend many losses don’t matter, and they are even allowed to count certain types of debt -- or money owed to someone else -- as capital.

Tangible common starts with common shareholder equity. This amounts to a company’s net assets, minus preferred stock, which is left out because it acts like debt. Tangible common also excludes squishy intangible assets such as goodwill, which is a bookkeeping entry leftover from acquiring other companies, and mortgage-servicing rights, which reflect the value of future income from collecting and processing loan payments.

Going Underground

Bank of America, for instance, had $35.8 billion of tangible common equity as of Dec. 31, before it completed its government-aided acquisition of Merrill Lynch & Co. That figure falls to negative $1.7 billion once it’s adjusted so that all financial assets and liabilities are measured at fair value, using the numbers BofA disclosed in its footnote. The fair-value version shows BofA needs lots more common equity -- badly.

Wells Fargo’s tangible common equity was $13.5 billion as of Dec. 31. On a fair-value basis, it was negative $133 million. That makes the bank’s $40.9 billion stock-market capitalization look awfully rich.

In total, eight of the 24 banks in the KBW Bank Index had negative tangible common equity on a fair-value basis, including SunTrust, KeyCorp, Fifth Third Bancorp, Huntington Bancshares Inc., Marshall & Ilsley Corp. and Regions Financial Corp.

Even with those fair-value tweaks, tangible common still might overstate a bank’s ability to absorb losses. It includes deferred-tax assets, which are pent-up losses that companies hope to use someday to cut their tax bills. The problem with those is that they’re valuable only to profitable companies that are paying income taxes. Wells Fargo’s capital would look even worse if its $13.9 billion of net deferred taxes were excluded. Same at Bank of America, which said it had $8.7 billion of the stuff.

Good News

The news isn’t all gloomy. Seven banks in the KBW index said the fair values of their loans were higher than their carrying amounts: Bank of New York Mellon Corp., Northern Trust Corp., People’s United Financial Inc., Comerica Inc., BB&T Corp., Cullen/Frost Bankers Inc. and Commerce Bancshares Inc.

For all but one of those companies, Bank of New York, tangible common equity wound up being higher on a fair-value basis. The same was true at Citigroup Inc. because of lower fair-value figures for its debt.

JPMorgan Chase & Co.’s tangible common equity drops to $56.4 billion, or just 2.7 percent of tangible assets, from $71.9 billion if you plug in the bank’s fair-value figures. Mainly that’s because JPMorgan said its loans were worth $21.7 billion less than their carrying value as of Dec. 31.

Fair-value footnotes of this sort aren’t new. The Financial Accounting Standards Board has required them annually since 1993. The board plans to start mandating them on a quarterly basis, beginning this month. So they’re sure to gain prominence.

Back in November 1992, in the wake of the savings-and-loan mess, Henry B. Gonzalez, the U.S. House Banking Committee’s chairman at the time, wrote a letter to Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan in praise of the FASB disclosure rules. The fair- value revelations would pierce “accounting camouflage” and “prove numerous banks to be insolvent,” he wrote, according to a Jan. 5, 1993, article in the New York Times.

Man, was he right.

[LongTrader]

Einblicke in die Denkweise von Aktienstrategen:

Top 10 headlines that could signal a market bottom

1. A significant (more than 10%) one- or two-day drop in the market.
2. Timothy Geithner is replaced with Paul Volcker.
3. The 100th day of a bankruptcy by General Motors Corp.
4. Gold at $2,000 an ounce.
5. The Dow Jones Industrial Average changes more than two names at the same time, and/or adds names to increase the overall number of stocks in the index.
6. New York Stock Exchange daily volume drops to 1 billion shares for 30 sessions in a row
7. One million jobs lost in a month.
8. The market starts to rally on bad news.
9. Stock market favorites see 15% to 20% declines.
10. CNBC goes off the air.

9, 8 und 1 haben in der Vergangenheit zumindest für handelbare Rallyes > 1 Monat Dauer gereicht.

Den Rest halte ich für Wunschdenken nach dem Motto: "Das wäre ein Weltuntergang, also kann es danach nur mehr besser werden."
Wie diese Baisse gezeigt hat, kann es immer noch schlimmer kommen...

Zwischenstand:
$INDU -54,4%
$SPX -57,7%
$MID -57,1%
$SML -59,3%
$RUT -60,0%
IWC -64,8%
$NDX -54,5%

$SPX Sektoren:
Technologie -54,2%
Gesundheit -40,4%
Energie -58,9%
Industrie -63,2%
Finanzen -83,9%
Consumer Staples -36,3%
Konsumzykliker -60,4%
Versorger -48,1%
Grundstoffe -61,3%

ausgewählte Industrien:
Banken-85,3%
Einzelhandel -43,2%
geschlossene Immobilienfonds -75,7%
Hausbauer -90,4%

*********************

Wie kommt eine bankrotte Versicherung zu Geldgeschenken ohne Ende?
Man erpreßt die Regierung!
Macht übrigens auch die Autoindustrie bisher erfolgreich.
-->
AIG got fourth rescue by warning of bank failure

American International Group successfully appealed for its fourth U.S. rescue by telling regulators its collapse would cripple money-market funds, force Europe banks to raise capital and cause competing insurers to fail, Bloomberg News reported, citing a 21-page draft AIG presentation dated Feb. 26. That presentation was circulated to federal and state regulators, the report said.

[Green]

Zitat von LongTrader

Wie kommt eine bankrotte Versicherung zu Geldgeschenken ohne Ende?
Man erpreßt die Regierung!
Macht übrigens auch die Autoindustrie bisher erfolgreich.
-->
AIG got fourth rescue by warning of bank failure

American International Group successfully appealed for its fourth U.S. rescue by telling regulators its collapse would cripple money-market funds, force Europe banks to raise capital and cause competing insurers to fail, Bloomberg News reported, citing a 21-page draft AIG presentation dated Feb. 26. That presentation was circulated to federal and state regulators, the report said.

hier ist das "vertrauliche papier" - obwohl die probleme weitgehend bekannt sind (z.b. versicherung von firmenkrediten rund um die welt), trotzdem interessant:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13112282/Aig-Systemic-090309

leider lässt sich kein text herauskopieren.

eines der grossen systemnischen risiken wäre ein "run on th bank" bei den lebensversicherungen.

und sie gehen noch weiter: im endeffekt würde ein failure von AIG nachhaltig das vertrauen der gläubiger in die usa selbst (und damit treasuries) beschädigen.

liest sich wirklich nicht lustig, im schlimmsten fall würde die finanzwelt untergehen (ist m.e. nicht übertrieben).

"insurance is the oxygen of the free enterprise system. without the promise of insurance against life´s adversities, the fundamentals of capitalism are undermined.."


ruhig mal das horrorpapier lesen.