Why Its Good to Own the Ratings Agencies (Or At Least to Have the Same Owner)

Dean Baker speaks to the issue of the US and its AAA rating.

I had considered that the Ratings Agencies might become instruments of national policy, implicated as they are in numerous scandals and misbehaviour. If you don't do the time, then you must have turned cooperative and informant in at least a soft and accommodating way.

But I had never considered this particular angle. Now there is room for doubt that they might serve the will of the US government, but there should be no doubt, given their recent history, that they are all too often willing to say and do whatever pleases Wall Street.

"....This means that if Moody’s were to downgrade the government’s debt, to be consistent it must also downgrade the debt of Citigroup, Goldman Sachs and the other big banks. If Moody’s downgrades the government’s debt, without downgrading the debt of the big banks – or even threatens to downgrade the government’s debt without also threatening to downgrade the debt of the big banks – then it is more likely acting in pursuit of Wall Street’s political agenda than presenting its best assessment of the creditworthiness of the U.S. government.

It is unfortunate that we have to suspect a major credit-rating agency of such dishonesty, but given its track record, serious people have no choice. To paraphrase an old Winston Churchill joke, we already know about the character of the bond-rating agencies, we are only asking if they are prostituting themselves now."

Dean Bakes, Will the US Lose Its AAA Rating?

The quotation that Dean Baker references from Churchill brings to mind this famous anecdote from another British wit:

George Bernard Shaw once found himself at a dinner party, seated beside an attractive woman. "Madam," he asked, "would you go to bed with me for fifty thousand pounds?"

The colossal sum gave the woman pause, and after reflection, she coyly replied: "Perhaps."

"And if I were to offer you five pounds?" Shaw asked.

"Mr. Shaw!" the woman exclaimed indignantly. "What do you take me for!"

"We have already established what you are," Shaw calmly replied. "Now we are merely haggling over price."

Today's CFTC Hearing on Metals Position Limits

Pretty much what you might expect. The gorillas hate restrictions, and threaten to take their business elsewhere if anyone tries to regulate them. Since there are only a few major metals exchanges in the world, TOCOM, LBMA, and COMEX, one might think the CFTC could pick up the phone and coordinate something with their counterparts without straining the smoothness of their golf swings.

For the most part commissioners say they are afraid of limiting transparency by increasing transparency requirements. As if there is sufficient market transparency today.

So let's not limit cheating, because it might lessen the volume of fraud on their exchanges and drive it to other countries. Let's see, like Japan, which has MORE transparency by company position, and London, which is mostly a physical market without futures as I recall. The FSA is cracking down on fraud. Maybe that will drive more business over here. Better tell them to ease up.

Perhaps the Commission is concerned that the financial pirates might try and take over Havana and turn it into their private casino. Oops, been there, tried that, too corrupt for their local standards. How about Somalia? They seem to be open to new free market trading concepts.

Gentlemen. Don't worry so much about other countries. Most of the recent financial frauds seem to be originating just to the east of the Hudson River and west of Long Island. Clean up your own house, and let the world look to its own devices.

For the most part as a regulator, the CFTC seems like the FED, but without the pocket protectors and PhD's, and the formal ownership by those whom it is supposed to be regulating.

Time for a change, America. I hate to sound negative, but if anything comes of this I will be astonished. The change will come after there is a major scandal, or a breakdown in the markets. And then the push will be to 'move on' and not look at what anyone did or did not do, but how we can 'fix it' by moving the regulatory responsibility to a committee of Chicago aldermen, or a contingent of Beverly Hills divorce lawyers. Are the Westies available for regulatory outsourcing? Hey, I know who can do it, after all, it's God's work.

What they said at CFTC hearing on metals limits

March 25 (Reuters) - The Commodity Futures Trading Commission held a hearing on Thursday to examine whether position limits are needed to curb speculation in metals futures markets.

Here are comments from participants:

GARY GENSLER, Chairman, CFTC

"Based upon what we learn, we will further review CFTC rules to determine what, if any, course of action is most appropriate." (Goldman Sachs alumni, and a Rubin protege.)

MICHAEL DUNN, Democrat commissioner, CFTC

"I am concerned that position limits in regulated futures markets without corresponding limits in the over-the-counter markets may result in less transparency in our markets, if those presently trading on exchanges move to over-the-counter and other opaque markets to circumvent CFTC regulations." (The benefit of course is that Joe Average doesn't trade on the unregulated and opaque markets, and won't be skinned on a weekly basis, or at least unless he or she is a qualified investor. Still, a decent thought.)

BART CHILTON, Democrat commissioner, CFTC

"The sensible, reasonable approach to position limits that guards against manipulation and stops excessive speculation is what we need to protect consumers.

I hope this hearing helps put us on a fast-track to getting a proposal out there." (A lone voice of reform. Bart is a man of the people.)

SCOTT O'MALIA, Republican commissioner, CFTC

"The exchanges registered with the commission are not the market's epicenter. Significant price discovery in these markets takes place abroad in London." (Let the FSA do it. Mentor is Mitch McConnell.)

"We must ensure that any rules or regulations do not offer any opportunities for regulatory arbitrage or decreased transparency of U.S. markets."

TOM LASALA, chief regulatory officer, CME Group (CME.O)

"The only impact that CFTC-imposed limits will have in the metals market will be to shift business away from U.S. exchanges to less-regulated or even wholly unregulated markets that are beyond the commission's jurisdictional reach." (Therefore one should never regulate because people will just move their business offshore. But that does beg the question of protecting AMERICAN investors and regulating THEIR markets. Very discouraging to hear this from the 'chief regulatory officer.')

DIARMUID O'HEGARTY, London Metal Exchange

"We've put a lot of work over the past 100 years to try and learn from the various mistakes in the market over the years and what we've ended up with is, I think, as good as it gets." (Got tungsten?)

JEFF BURGHARDT, Copper and Brass Fabricators Council

"It is our belief that investment funds have been the major driver behind the record high prices we have seen in many commodities in recent years, including copper."

"Increasing initial margin amounts charged to investment funds will be a more effective solution to the problem." (User Associations always want to limit the longs.)

TOM CALLAHAN, CEO of NYSE Liffe

"It is not clear that federally designed position limits for metals would have the desired effect of limiting unreasonable and abrupt price movements for these contracts just as federally set position limits for certain agricultural products did not appear to protect those products from price volatility during the recent commodity price bull run."

KEVIN NORRISH, Managing director commodities research, Barclays Capital

"Over the last 10 years, metals and energy have migrated to more transparent, better regulated markets. However, the wrong implementation could drive both the metals and energy markets back into that more opaque territory." (Always with the threats to get their way.)

JEREMY CHARLES, global head, HSBC's precious metals business

"Given the global nature of the precious metals markets, unilateral action on the part of the Commission could simply cause large market participants to shift business to other markets." (You can no longer regulate anything that takes place in your country because of globalization. Multinationals rule the world.)

JEFFREY CHRISTIAN, CPM Group

"My position is that the proposal is a mistake. Federally managed position limits seem both inappropriate and unnecessary." (perma-bear, par excellence)

RICHARD STRAIT, Triland USA, division of Mitsubishi

"In the misguided event position limits are mandated to the U.S. metals futures products, they should be applicable to the spot month only and not ... spread positions and only on an as-needed basis." (We reserve the right to manage the outer month prices.)

STEVE SHERROD, acting director of surveillance, CFTC

Citing an internal study of disaggregated commitment of traders data for COMEX, NYSE Liffe:

"In gold for all months combined and for a trader's net futures and delta-adjusted options combined position, 56 traders exceeded the position accountability levels on one or more days during the two-and-one-quarter-year sample period.

"The maximum number of traders holding positions in gold at or above the position accountability level on any one day was 26."

"Seventeen traders on average exceeded accountability levels for an average of 34 Tuesdays of the 115 Tuesdays in the sample period. The average position while over accountability levels was 20,233 contracts." (Ok we'll bite. What was the accountability level? What would happen if you set it higher to some percentage of the open interest? And what is special about a Tuesday? I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for some bullion today?)

MICHAEL MASTERS, Masters Capital Management

"Passive speculators are an invasive species that will continue to damage the markets until they are eradicated." (Who are these passive speculators, and why must we kill them? Are they getting in the way of the squid's beak?)

MARK EPSTEIN, individual trader

"If there weren't these big monster, guerrilla traders out there ... there would arrive a much more robust market-making community, the market will be much more effective in finding prices." (You say it brother.)

BILL MURPHY, Chairman, Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee

"The gold cartel ... thumb their noses at you because in over a period of complaints in 18 months of the (CFTC's) silver market manipulation investigation nothing has been done to stop them." (Well said, except I don't think those were their noses they were sticking out at them. No noses could be that small and that ugly.)

(Reporting by Christopher Doering, Frank Tank, Tom Doggett; Editing by Roberta Rampton; Editing by Marguerita Choy and Jim Marshall)

This brings to mind the famous quote from Meister Eckhart, "The price of inaction is far greater than the cost of making a mistake.”

But it is a sad reality of modern management that you are never blamed for doing nothing, and too often richly rewarded, but you are never allowed to make a mistake.

When I was in corporate life, the 'big boss' told me "If you do ninety-nine things exceptionally right, but one thing wrong, we will only remember the one thing that you did wrong."

And then he had the nerve to ask the next week in a meeting, "How can we get our employees to take more risks?"

This is the point where Obama must again begin to lead, to change the culture in Washington. The regulatory process needs the stimulus of words of direction, the proper motivational incentives, and perhaps, backed occasionally by a size 11 shoe.

NY Fed Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities Pass Fail List

Here are the CMBS that the NY FED Accepted or Rejected today, by CUSIP.

One needs a pricey subscription service or handy access to a Bloomberg terminal to look them up to determine who owns or at least authored what.

Here is a list of the owners of the CUSIP's. Obviously I cannot guarantee its accuracy. But since you are paying for this Treasury subsidy operation, I thought you might like to have at least some indication of who the recipients are.

SP Daily Chart - Backing Off Resistance at the Breakout But Still Above Support

The quiet backstory is that the Five and Seven Year Treasury Auctions did not go all that well, with Zimbabwe Ben and his Primary Dealer Pranksters scarfing up a good share of the auctions, with a chunk even going to their London subsidiaries so it would not be completely awkward.

The headline action is centered on the Dow Industrials, with the psychological 11,000 number tantalizingly close. The Industrials are the bright, shiny spinner designed to loosen the pockets of mom and pop, to lure them out of their bonds and cash, and into overpriced equities.

One really has to question whether there can be any serious market decline while Timmy is considering selling the Treasuries stake in Citi. One might even wonder if this entire ropeline rally from 1045 is not in support of a major plop of something not very palatable into the public domain.

ORCL after the bell.

On the news front, according to Zerohedge the London FSA is beginning an investigation into the front-running of block trades

We do not know if the SEC is on board with this yet. Perhaps someone can post the FSA's notice of investigation on PornHub. Maybe the US ought to consider outsourcing their Financial Consumer Protection Agency to London. It makes more sense to have it there than with the Fed.

NY Precious Metals Prices Pressured into Futures Options Expiration

As gold and silver trading in the states moves into another futures option expiration and the rollover from the April contract with first delivery notice time approaching, the paper gold market deviates once again from the world market for bullion.

As John Brimelow notes:

Intriguingly, so also may be China. Mitsui-HK today explicitly says:
“While euro tried to pull the yellow metal lower, Chinese buying wanted to push it higher”

More concretely, the Shanghai market closed at a $6.08 premium to world gold of $1,091.98, the second day of unusually high premiums. At the equivalent of 8,469 NY lots, volume actually exceeded TOCOM for the first time I can remember. Andy Smith of Bache suggested the other day that China might resort to buying gold to groom its foreign trade statistics, which he pointed out was done by Japan in the 80s and Taiwan in the 90s. Official action would not show in Shanghai, of course, but maybe the hive mind is at work.

Local Vietnam gold stood at a $27.89 premium to world gold of $1,087.20 early today (Wednesday $24.41/$1,104.20).

While on day session volume equivalent to 7,804 NY contracts TOCOM open interest slipped 2.9 tonnes (900 NY), the public added 3.67 tonnes (6.8%) to their long. The active contract added 15 yen and world gold rose $1.25 during the session to go out $3 above NY’s depressed Wednesday 4PM level.

Gold in Euros rallied fairly smoothly from the end of yesterdays’ NY aftermarket until the European open, then moved approximately sideways until 10AM NY. $US gold did the same, but more erratically. At its intraday high around 7-30 AM it was up $6.80. A raid seems now to be underway. Estimated volume at 9AM is reported to be an eye-popping 206,132 lots which if not an error will need some explaining; the CME website indicates volume at 10 AM was roughly 87,000 of which about half was done before the floor session.

With the option expiry still pending price resistance in NY is to be expected, which will greatly please the now clearly activated Eastern physical buyers.

Do you think they were banging the price lower with heavy short selling in the early hours to depress the price below the key strike prices around 1090 and more importantly, 1100? When there are no limits on positions and you have deep pockets in a fairly thin market, the opportunities for manipulating price action becomes a rather compelling temptation, especially if you think the Fed 'has your back' and expect to be bailed out by them or the Exchanges if you are ever cornered for delivery of what you have already sold.

While traders can make money just following the momentum of the big trading desks on this obvious price pattern, it does not foster confidence to see the markets so obviously pushed around, and for the regulators to be so obviously asleep at their desks (or surfing porn, as the recent investigations of the SEC have disclosed).

This is not to say that there are no government officials and regulators trying to do the right thing for the public which they serve and the oaths which they have taken. Elizabeth Warren, Chair of the TARP Oversight Program, and Bart Chilton, a CFTC Commissioner, and a Bush nominee no less, who are providing outstanding leadership on the subject of market reforms. It is would be good to see them receive more visible support from this Administration, to encourage the many in government who would be more than wiling to act, given the appropriate encouragement and leadership.

Gold April Futures Hourly Chart



Gold June Futures Hourly Chart



Gold Weekly Chart



Silver Weekly Chart



Mining Index

Gold in US Dollars Correlated to US Sovereign Debt

The fundamentals supporting the long term trend.

Brown's Bottom: Was This a Bailout of the Multinational Bullion Banks Involving the NY Fed?

The bottom referred to, of course, is the bottom of the gold price, and the sale of approximately 400 tonnes of the UK's gold at the bottom of the market.

The sticky issue is not so much the actual sale itself, but the method under which the sale was taken and who benefited.
There has been widespread speculation that the manner in which the sale was conducted and announced was in support of the nascent euro, which Brown favored. This does not seem to hold together however.

There is also a credible speculation that the sale was designed to benefit a few of the London based bullion banks which were heavily short the precious metals, and were looking for a push down in price and a boost in supply to cover their positions and avoid a default. The unlikely names mentioned were AIG, which was trading heavily in precious metals, and the House of Rothschild. The terms of the bailout was that once their positions were covered, they were to leave the LBMA, the largest physical bullion market in the world.

"LONDON, June 1, 2004 (Reuters) -- AIG International Ltd., part of American International Group Inc., will no longer be a London Bullion Market Association (LBMA) market maker in gold and silver, the LBMA said on Tuesday."

LONDON, April 14, 2004 (Reuters) — NM Rothschild & Sons Ltd., the London-based unit of investment bank Rothschild, will withdraw from trading commodities, including gold, in London as it reviews its operations, it said on Wednesday.

The manner in which the sale was conducted, and the speed at which it was undertaken, without consultation of the Bank of England, made many of the City of London's financiers a bit uneasy. The sale as bailout was given impetus by this revelation which surfaced some years later.

"In front of 3 witnesses, Bank of England Governor Eddie George spoke to Nicholas J. Morrell (CEO of Lonmin Plc) after the Washington Agreement gold price explosion in Sept/Oct 1999. Mr. George said "We looked into the abyss if the gold price rose further. A further rise would have taken down one or several trading houses, which might have taken down all the rest in their wake.
Therefore at any price, at any cost, the central banks had to quell the gold price, manage it. It was very difficult to get the gold price under control but we have now succeeded. The US Fed was very active in getting the gold price down. So was the U.K."

So it appears that long before AIG crafted its enormous positions in CDS with the likes of Goldman Sachs, requiring a bailout by young Tim and the NY Fed, it may have been engaging in short positions in the metals markets, especially silver, and may have required a bailout by England to preserve the integrity of the LBMA.

There are also some who think that the gold sale provided a front-running opportunity for that most rapaciously well-connected of Wall Street Banks, Goldman Sachs. Gold, Goldman, and Gordon

This is the undercurrent of the inquiries in England today, and the controversy surrounding Brown's Bottom. There is thought that the information disclosed on the London sales will be heavily redacted to protect the involvement of the US Federal Reserve bank, which is said to have engaged in gold swaps to further depress the price, in conjunction with a major producer and a NY based money center bank. The people of the UK deserve answers.
.

UK Telegraph
Explain why you sold Britain's gold, Gordon Brown told
By Holly Watt and Robert Winnett11:55AM GMT 24 Mar 2010

Gordon Brown has been ordered to release information before the general election about his controversial decision to sell Britain's gold reserves.

The decision to sell the gold – taken by Mr Brown when he was Chancellor – is regarded as one of the Treasury's worst financial mistakes and has cost taxpayers almost £7 billion.

Mr Brown and the Treasury have repeatedly refused to disclose information about the gold sale amid allegations that warnings were ignored.

Following a series of freedom of information requests from The Daily Telegraph over the past four years, the Information Commissioner has ordered the Treasury to release some details. The Treasury must publish the information demanded within 35 calendar days – by the end of April.

The sale is expected to be become a major election issue, casting light on Mr Brown's decisions while at the Treasury.

Last night, George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, demanded that the information was published immediately. "Gordon Brown's decision to sell off our gold reserves at the bottom of the market cost the British taxpayer billions of pounds," he said. "It was one of the worst economic judgements ever made by a chancellor.

"The British public have a right to know what happened and why so much of their money was lost. The documents should be published immediately."

Between 1999 and 2002, Mr Brown ordered the sale of almost 400 tons of the gold reserves when the price was at a 20-year low. Since then, the price has more than quadrupled, meaning the decision cost taxpayers an estimated £7 billion, according to Mike Warburton of the accountants Grant Thornton.

It is understood that Mr Brown pushed ahead with the sale despite serious misgivings at the Bank of England. It is not thought that senior Bank experts were even consulted about the decision, which was driven through by a small group of senior Treasury aides close to Mr Brown.

The Treasury has been officially censured by the Information Commissioner over its attempts to block the release of information about the gold sales.

The Information Commissioner's decision itself is set to become the subject of criticism. The commissioner has taken four years to rule on the release of the documents, despite intense political and public interest in the sales. Officials have missed a series of their own deadlines to order the information's release, which will now prevent a proper parliamentary analysis of the disclosures.

It can also be disclosed that the commissioner has held a series of private meetings with the Treasury and has agreed for much of the paperwork to remain hidden from the public. The Treasury was allowed to review the decision notice when it was in draft form – and may have been permitted to make numerous changes.

In the official notice, the Information Commissioner makes it clear that only a "limited" release of information has been ordered.

Ed Balls, who is now the Schools Secretary, Ed Miliband, now the Climate Change Secretary, and Baroness Vadera, another former minister, were all close aides to the chancellor during the relevant period.

If the information is not released by the end of April, the Treasury will be in "contempt of court" and will face legal action. A spokesman said last night that the Treasury was not preparing to appeal against the ruling.

How auctions cost taxpayer £7bn

The price of gold has quadrupled since Gordon Brown sold more than half of Britain’s reserves.

The Treasury pre-announced its plans to sell 395 tons of the 715 tons held by the Bank of England, which caused prices to fall.

The bullion was sold in 17 auctions between 1999 and 2002, with dealers paying between $256 and $296 an ounce. Since then, the price has increased rapidly. Yesterday, it stood at $1,100 an ounce.

The taxpayer lost an estimated £7 billion, twice the amount lost when Britain left the Exchange Rate Mechanism in 1992.

The proceeds from the sales were invested in dollars, euros and yen. In recent years, most other countries have begun buying gold again in large quantities.

Max Keiser Reports

SP Daily Chart: The Financial Engineering of Bubble-nomics

The SP is reaching a high note here. It is an attempt, in my judgement, to pump up financial assets, led by price manipulation and not any economic fundamentals or legitimate price discovery. It might go higher, but higher from here it looks like bubble territory, if we are not there already.

Overdue for a fairly stiff correction, but do not get in front of it for the sake of your portfolio. I would not underestimate the Fed's willingness to create a new bubble to attempt to counteract the effects of the last two. What else can they do given the hole into which they have dug themselves? It will take a serious financial reform and economic restructuring effort to correct this. Until then the looting continues.

Interest Rate Swap Spreads on Treasuries Turn Negative for the First Time

Does this imply that the comparable LIBOR is lower than US Treasuries? If so, yikes (I think).

Purely technical, the result of govenment mandates for insurance companies and pension funds to match duration obligations, and some slightly more exotic hedging from the denizens of the trading desks?

Some also speculate that this is one or two primary dealers leveraging their interest rate derivatives. And that they are anticipating some fresh antics from Zimbabwe Ben.

I am fresh out of speculation on this, so if anyone has a cogent insight on this, I would not mind hearing it. You know how to reach me by email.

It does looks like the mispricing of risk. And as we all know, that can leave a mark. It might not be so bad if this is just a temporary thing, but I get the sense that the government's sworn commitment to subsidizing moral hazard is poking the market's animal spirits in the ass, and the risk trade is back on.

This seems to be a recurrent trend here in the Hogfather's School of Economic Mischief and Misery.

And in the meantime, Watch the Bond Market, not Bank Lending or Velocity.

Bloomberg
Ten-Year Swap Spread Turns Negative on Renewed Demand for Risk
By Susanne Walker
March 23, 2010 12:45 EDT

March 23 (Bloomberg) -- The 10-year U.S. swap spread turned negative for the first time on record amid rising demand for higher-yielding assets such as corporate and emerging market securities.

The gap between the rate to exchange floating- for fixed- interest payments and comparable maturity Treasury yields for 10 years, known as the swap spread, narrowed to as low as negative 0.44 basis point, the lowest since at least 1988, when Bloomberg began collecting the data. The spread narrowed 3.38 basis points to negative 0.38 basis point at 12:40 p.m. in New York.

A negative swap spread means the Treasury yield is higher than the swap rate, which typically is greater given the floating payments are based on interest rates that contain credit risk, such as the London interbank offered rate, or Libor. The 30-year swap spread turned negative for the first time in August 2008, after the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. triggered a surge of hedging in swaps. The difference narrowed to negative 18.56 basis points today.

“It’s hedge-related activity related to new corporate issuance,” said Christian Cooper, an interest-rate strategist at Royal Bank of Canada in New York, one of 18 primary dealers that trade with the Federal Reserve. “As more and more institutions receive, then swap rates will go lower.”

Interest Rate Hedging

Debt issued by financial firms is typically swapped from fixed-rate back into floating-rate payments, triggering receiving in swaps, which causes swap spreads to narrow. An increase in demand to pay fixed rates and receive floating forces swap spreads wider, provided Treasury yields are stable. Corporations that issue bonds also use the swaps market to hedge against changes in interest rates that may result in increased debt service costs.

The extra yield investors demand to own corporate bonds rather than government debt was unchanged yesterday at 154 basis points, or 1.54 percentage points, the narrowest since November 2007, the Bank of America Merrill Lynch Global Broad Market Corporate Index shows. High-yield debt returned a record 57.5 percent in 2009, and another 4.3 percent this year, according to the Bank of America index data.

“There’s a lot of money on the sidelines waiting for mortgage-backeds to cheapen up,” said Cooper. “In the absence of them getting cheaper and as the end of the buyback program comes near, people are looking for high quality spread products, so a good place to park is in swap spreads.”