logo

They're At It Again - Securitization
By: Karl Denninger   Monday, July 06, 2009 11:52 AM

Vote for next session
The next market session will close:

Its not enough to rig leverage limits as Henry Paulson asked for and was granted when he ran Goldman Sachs.

Its not enough to watch both Bear and Lehman blow up as a consequence of that excessive leverage.

No, now we have to find new and innovative ways to cheat capital requirements!

Investment banks, including Goldman Sachs and Barclays Capital, are inventing schemes to reduce the capital cost of risky assets on banks’ balance sheets, in the latest sign that financial market innovation is far from dead.

The schemes, which Goldman insiders refer to as “insurance” and BarCap calls “smart securitisation”, use different mechanisms to achieve the same goal: cutting capital costs by up to half in some cases, at the same time as regulators are threatening to force banks to increase their capital requirements.

This sort of garbage needs to be treated as conspiracy to defraud and land the "inventors" in prison.

How many times do we have to see the same horror show?

The purpose of capital requirements is to insure that a bank's unsecured lending, that is, the loan value outstanding in excess of the collateral's value in a sale at the market, never exceeds the bank's excess capital.

So long as this holds true there while the bank may become insolvent and need to be seized there will never be an insured depositor loss.

The entire purpose of SIVs and other off-balance-sheet games, along with this sort of nonsense being "worked on" here, is to hide capital requirements from regulators and governments so as to increase leverage ratios, thereby increasing the amount of profit that can be earned from a given amount of capital.

The problem is that there is no such thing as a free lunch and for every potential profit from such a scheme the amount of potential loss increases by the same amount.

However, some regulators may be wary of the invention of new pooled asset derivatives, especially if they are perceived as a way to avoid regulatory capital requirements.

Some rival bankers also view the schemes with scepticism. “This is a system of capital arbitrage,” said one senior banker at another investment bank. “The need for capital just miraculously disappears.”

Disappears eh?

Sounds like a scam to me.

Get the handcuffs Danno.


(1)
 
7/7/2009 6:15:16 PM
Securitize Knowledge assets by Dan
Why don't they securitize human knowledge and sell bonds against future innovation?  This is relatively easy. The Ingenesist Project specifies a knowledge inventory, a percentile search engine, and an innovation banking system that combines diverse knowledge assets to for predictable innovation.  Cash flows are risk adjusted and amalgamated.  These can be diversified again and split into bonds to finance innovation.  Should be a no-brainer? http://ingenesist.com
Rating: (1) (0)
Post Comment
Name:  
Alert for new comments:
Your email:
Your Website:
Title:
Comments:
   
 
 
 
 
   
 

The above story is the opinion of the author only and it does not reflect iStockAnalyst opinion. Further, the author is not personally advising you regarding the suitability of the story for your investment needs. In no event iStockAnalyst will be liable for any loss or damage including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss or damage, or any loss or damage whatsoever arising from or arising out of, or in connection with the use of this information. Please consult your investment advisor before making any investment decision.
  
Advertisement
Special Offers
Partner Center
Recent Articles by Karl Denninger



Subscribe to Email Alerts rss feed or RSS feeds rss feed for articles from more than 500 contributors, press releases, SEC filings and full text news from more than four thousand sources.
Fundamental data is provided by Zacks Investment Research, market data is provided by AlphaTrade. , and Commentary and Press Releases provided by Quotemedia