Der USA Bären-Thread

"Eine größere Finanzmacht gibt es auf der ganzen Welt nicht."

Doch, die USA sind die Nr. 1. Japan ist die Nr. 2 - aber auch das zeigt, wie wichtig das Land ist relativ zu anderen (in Europa).

Culprit #1: Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan was no smarter than a fifth grader.

Greenspan did two big things wrong.

First, the former Fed chairman took interest rates far too low and maintained those levels for far too long a period in the early 2000s, well after the stock market's bubble was pierced. (Stated simply, he panicked).

The Fed's very loose monetary policy served to encourage the new, marginal and non-traditional home buyer -- the speculator and the investor, not the dweller -- to embark on a speculative orgy in home purchases not seen in nearly a century.

Over time, home prices, especially on the coasts, were elevated to levels that stretched affordability well beyond the means of most buyers. Ultimately, despite relatively strong employment and low interest rates, the residential housing market crashed hard.

Second, Greenpsan suggested -- at just the wrong time and at the very bottom of the interest rate cycle -- that homeowners retreat from traditional, fixed rate mortgages and turn to more creative and floating rate mortgages -- interest only, adjustable option ARMs, negative amortization, etc.

He said this in February 2004 at a Credit Union National Association 2004 Governmental Affairs Conference:

"American consumers might benefit if lenders provided greater mortgage product alternatives to the traditional fixed-rate mortgage. To the degree that households are driven by fears of payment shocks but are willing to manage their own interest-rate risks, the traditional fixed-rate mortgage may be an expensive method of financing a home."

One year later Greenspan continued the same mantra and cited the social benefits of the financial industry's innovation as reflected in the proliferation of the subprime mortage market.

A brief look back at the evolution of the consumer finance market reveals that the financial services industry has long been competitive, innovative, and resilient. Innovation has brought about a multitude of new products, such as subprime loans and niche credit programs for immigrants. Such developments are representative of the market responses that have driven the financial services industry throughout the history of our country. With these advances in technology, lenders have taken advantage of credit-scoring models and other techniques for efficiently extending credit to a broader spectrum of consumers. The widespread adoption of these models has reduced the costs of evaluating the creditworthiness of borrowers, and in competitive markets cost reductions tend to be passed through to borrowers. Where once more-marginal applicants would simply have been denied credit, lenders are now able to quite efficiently judge the risk posed by individual applicants and to price that risk appropriately. These improvements have led to rapid growth in subprime mortgage lending; indeed, today subprime mortgages account for roughly 10% of the number of all mortgages outstanding, up from just 1% or 2% in the early 1990s...We must conclude that innovation and structural change in the financial services industry has been critical in providing expanded access to credit for the vast majority of consumers, including those of limited means. Without these forces, it would have been impossible for lower-income consumers to have the degree of access to credit markets that they now have. This fact underscores the importance of our roles as policymakers, researchers, bankers, and consumer advocates in fostering constructive innovation that is both responsive to market demand and beneficial to consumers.

But even as Greenspan was taking interest rates to levels that encouraged the egregious use of mortgage debt and exhorting the opportunities in creative and variable mortgage financing, there were some smart cookies out there who recognized the risks; here are quotes from two of the smartest who warned of the danger in the mortgage market.

When I took economics in World War II, and we were studying the Great Depression, one of the reasons given were all the interest-only loans that came due. They were an indication of an economy getting into unsound lending. Ever since then it's been a rule that when you go into interest-only loans, you're very substantially increasing the risk of default.

-- L. William Seidman. Former Chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and Chairman of the Resolution Trust Corporation

Our own Robert Marcin put it even more precisely (and vividly) in his prescient warning back in mid-2005.

If Greenspan had a clue (remember, he didn't have one in the tech bubble, or maybe he did), he would jawbone the banking industry to tighten or even strangle lending standards for residential real estate. He should not kill the entire economy to slow the real estate markets. Now that bag people can buy condos in Phoenix with no down payments, maybe the Fed should get involved. You can't expect mortgage bankers to do anything; they get paid to lend money. But like Greenspan's unwillingness to raise margin rates in 1999, I expect him to do nothing until the market declines. Then, the taxpayers will be on the hook for the stupidities of the real estate speculators. Remember, I expect a sequel to the RTC in the future.

-- Robert Marcin, Making Money Before Housing Crumbles.

Greenspan will go untouched and will continue to give speeches at $200,000 a pop.

Culprit #2: Irrational lenders like Novastar, New Century, Fremont General, Option One, Accredited Home, OwnIt Mortgage Solutions and others were no smarter than a sixth grader.

Many of these mono-line subprime lenders grew from nothing to originating billions of dollars of mortgage loans almost overnight. Their rush to lend and helter skelter growth relied on the candor of the mortgagees and not on common sense, prudent lending or reasonable underwriting standards.

The growth in subprime-only originators was irrational, but the industry will now be rationalized and the marginal lenders will go bankrupt. And, in the fullness of time, the more diversified lenders will benefit from their demise.

Culprit #3: Wall Street was no smarter than a seventh grader.

The role of the brokerage community in the packaging, warehousing and trading of mortgage securities is immense, with about a 60% share of the mortgage financing market. After tax shelter abuses in the early 1980s, junk(y) bonds in the late 1980s, overpriced technology stocks and ludicrous IPOs and disingenuous research reports in the late 1990s, one would think that Wall Street had learned its lesson.

It has not.

Defending the indefensible -- despite the "policing" of the SEC and Gov. Spitzer's initiatives -- remains Wall Street's credo. Time and time again, the major brokerage firms exist for the purpose of selling product (stocks and bonds), not for providing objective research or for the commitment to client's profitability. The higher a market surges, the easier it is for Wall Street to peddle, and package, junk.

The magnitude of the potential gains are always too attractive and tempting particularly as product demand swells into another cycle excess, as it did in subprime. Astonishingly, even the obligatory emergency conference calls intended to persuade investors that all is well were superficial and failed to disclose the inherent conflicts that each and every multiline brokerage has.

The major brokerages will be litigated against -- again. They will pay large fines but will proceed in business until the next bubble -- which they will also capitalize on.

Culprit #4: The rating agencies were no smarter than an eighth grader.

The little-known secret in the subprime market is that the principal ratings agencies have been lax in their downgrades of subprime paper and securitizations. This should not be considered a surprise, because like their Wall Street brethren, they prosper from the rising tide of credit issuances. In doing so, like a teacher who has turned his back on a boisterous and disobedient class, those recalcitrant agencies -- Moody's, Fitch and S&P -- have ignored the erosion in credit quality and abetted the rush and market share taking of subprime lending.

According to Jim Grant's Interest Rate Observer, downgrades at Moody's were even with upgrades in 2005. In 2006, downgrades/upgrades rose slightly to 1.19 to 1; this compares to the historical downgrade/upgrade ratio of 2.5 to 1. Importantly, until downgrades are issued by the agencies, investors routinely carry their investments at cost, or par -- downgrades force investments to mark to market ... and sell.

The rating agencies will likely go unscathed because they always do.

---

#6666cc; HEIGHT: 1px" width="100%" color=#6666cc noShade>

At time of publication, Kass and/or his funds were long JPM, BAC and C, although holdings can change at any time.

und zwar bei den Kreditkarten.

The next bubble to burst after the housing bubble may well be the credit bubble, and if the housing bubble initiates a financial bloodbath, a credit bubble burst is likely to be an economic Katrina unlike anything the American people have ever witnessed. Worse than the Great Depression? Unquestionably.

Ein interessanter Artikel dazu bei Yahoo Finance

What Credit Card Companies Don't Want You to Know

http://finance.yahoo.com/expert/article/millionaire/26303

Hier mal die Liste der Nationen, geordnet nach Größe ihre Bruttoinlandsprodukts.

USA ist die Nr. 1        (12,4 Billionen)

Japan ist Nr. 2          (4,5 Billionen)

Deutschland ist Nr. 3    (2,7 Billionen)

---

deine Aufstellung ist nett recherchiert, aber in meinem Posting #600 bezog sich die Aussage "größte Finanzmacht" auf das Geldvermögen, nicht auf das GDP.

I have also given readers steps to protect their portfolios and hedge long-term positions by using inverse exchange-traded funds. It might be a good experience for readers to go back through my columns over the past month and a half to educate themselves on the warning signals I was seeing.

Many readers have continued to email me questions about the use of these inverse ETFs. We will take another look at them today.

First let's take a look at the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq Composite and their support areas.

The S&P 500 Large-Cap Index had a confirmation follow-through day of over 2% on Tuesday on heavy volume. This is definitely confirming that a trend change is at hand and that institutions are liquidating positions into any strength. At this point, I don't think the March lows are going to hold, and the next support levels are between 1350 and 1360. If the SPX breaks those levels on heavy volume, we may be in for a very severe correction.

images.thestreet.com/rmoney/technicalanalysis/38697.gif" style="max-width:560px" align=center border=0>

We discussed earlier a possible Nasdaq top and the fact that my indicators confirmed at least an intermediate-term downtrend for all of the indices. We're seeing confirmation of that as of Tuesday in all the indices, but especially the Nasdaq, which has been one of the weakest. It also looks like the March lows are not going to hold, so the next possible support will be at 2300. A break below that on heavy volume will not be good.

images.thestreet.com/rmoney/technicalanalysis/38693.gif" style="max-width:560px" align=center border=0>

Let's look at the charts of the inverse ETFs I mentioned and what steps investors could take now.

The Short Dow 30 (DOG) ProShares fund is still in a position where you may be able to add to your exposure. You can see that these funds react in an opposite direction to the indices, and you will notice by the volume patterns that institutions are heavily accumulating positions in these funds.

DOG has built support at $64 and is now attempting to take out its March high of $66. Investors could apply two strategies here: You could buy at this level and place a protective sell stop below $64.00, or you could wait for the price to break above $66 and take a position there.

images.thestreet.com/rmoney/technicalanalysis/38694.gif" style="max-width:560px" align=center border=0>

The Short QQQ (PSQ) ProShares fund has also been building a short-term base between $63.50 and $65.00. Investors could use the same strategy here of buying in the current area or with a break above $65.50. I personally would have a close stop underneath support at $63.50

images.thestreet.com/rmoney/technicalanalysis/38695.gif" style="max-width:560px" align=center border=0>

The Short S&P 500 (SH) ProShares fund also remains in an area where you could add to your positions. Here I would make sure that I had a protective sell stop underneath the March low of $63.30.

images.thestreet.com/rmoney/technicalanalysis/38696.gif" style="max-width:560px" align=center border=0>

It looks like there is some serious deterioration developing in the market, most of which is blamed on the subprime lending situation and the exposure that has to the economy. I don't know how far or how deeply this will affect the general market. However, investors shouldn't focus too much on the reasons for this selloff but instead pay strict attention to the price and volume moves of the indices and their stocks.

That is what will give you a heads-up on what the institutions are doing, and by using protective sell stops and hedging your portfolios with inverse ETFs, it will help you keep your portfolio intact if the market starts falling apart. As always, this correction will develop into a solid buying opportunity to profit from good companies that have been thrown out with the bad.

Most of you who have been following my columns should have a large percentage of your assets in cash and could actually be profiting from this move down if you acquired any of the inverse ETFs. The key right now is to let the selling in the subprime meltdown work its way through the market and wait for solid opportunities to develop.

If you are a trader and accustomed to short-selling, I see some very good setups in many stocks. Do you homework and don't get greedy. You have to take profits much more quickly when you are shorting.

---

#6666cc; HEIGHT: 1px" width="100%" color=#6666cc noShade>At time of publication, Manning was long the Short Dow 30, Short QQQ and Short S&P 500 ETFs, although holdings can change at any time.

Stimmt, bei den Ersparnissen sind die Japaner weltweit Nr. 1 (Stand 2005), dicht gefolgt von den Kanadiern (Nr. 2) und den Deutschen (Nr. 3). USA kommt erst an 7. Stelle.

Quelle: www.dataranking.com/table.cgi?TP=ne08-1&LG=e&RG=1

Ein informatives Posting. Hast du einen Link @AL ?

Gründe sind zur Zeit relativ unerheblich, es ist 90% Psychologie. Das macht das Timing im jede Richtung umso schwerer.

Den Bullen unter euch empfehle ich dafür diesen Artikel:

biz.yahoo.com/ibd/070313/corner.html

Heute haben wir die Trendwende wohl definitiv noch nicht gesehen, höchstens einen ersten Test der März-Unterstützung. Aber da ist sicher das letzte Wort noch nicht gesprochen...  

Anti, Dank für die prompte Recherche in #607. Zum heutigen Abschluss noch ein Artikel von Mike Shedlock

Der Begriff "Helicopter" weckt bewusst an dieser Stelle eine ganz bestimmte Assoziation. Mike Shedlock zeigt den Unsinn dieser vorgeblichen Finanzhilfe des Staates für die Subprime – Schuldner auf und benennt Verantwortlichkeiten.

1st Helicopter Drop Now Being Organized

Bloomberg is reporting Senate Weighs Aid to 2.2 Million Subprime Borrowers

U.S. lawmakers will have to consider providing aid to about 2.2 million subprime mortgage borrowers who are at risk of defaulting and losing their homes, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd said today.

"The impact of losing 2.2 million homes I suspect will be in a lot of areas of our cities and towns that are already pretty hard hit, so we clearly want to look at that and legislate," Dodd, a Democrat from Connecticut, told reporters in Washington after a speech to the National League of Cities.

Foreclosures involving homeowners who took out subprime loans from 1998 until 2006 could cost $164 billion, Dodd said, quoting a December study by the Center for Responsible Lending in Durham, North Carolina. The government needs to provide at- risk homeowners "forbearance or something like that to give them a chance to work through and get a new financial instrument here that they can manage financially better," Dodd said.

[Mish: Why does the government "need" to do anything of the kind? If is stupid government policies in the first place that led to this mess. If there is a "need" to do anything it is the need to get rid of Fannie Mae, and all the affordable housing legislation that Congress has passed]

Congress "may need to do something much more quickly to provide some protection or you could end up with a lot of poverty and blight," Dodd said. Federal aid of a few billion dollars "may be a lot less costly" than $164 billion in lost wealth, he said.

[Mish: Let's face the facts. This has nothing to do with blight. This has everything to do with bailing out your banking cronies at the expense of the prudent. It also has to do with buying votes.]

Mortgage defaults during the next two years may rise to $225 billion, with about $170 billion tied to subprime loans, according to a report yesterday by analyst at Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. led by Srinivas Modukuri. Subprime borrowers are those with poor or limited credit backgrounds or high debt.

Dodd didn't specify the channel through which the government would offer aid. "I don't want to settle on the specifics of it, but clearly we are looking at what we can do to help out."

[Mish: I am 100% confident that whatever program is initiated will be what lending institutions ask for. None of it will do consumers any good at all.]

Dodd reaffirmed a plan to introduce a bill that would combat predatory lending. "There is a difference between a subprime lender and a predator, and I don't want to lose the subprime lender" he said.

"Finally the federal regulators are beginning to indicate that they want to start requiring similar standards to be used for prime and subprime lending," Dodd said, referring to the new guidelines.

[Mish: Like the Fed, Congress is acting 4 years and trillions of dollars too late. Where were you 4 years ago when something needed to be done?]

"I am a strong advocate of subprime lending," Dodd said. "I don't want that word to become a pejorative as junk bonds did."

[Mish: The fact that government is a "strong advocate of subprime lending" is one of the reasons we are in this mess. You and your "ownership society" have no business promoting housing over renting. It is the market's job to do that. When you interfere "stuff happens" to put the term politely. By the way, subprime is already as pejorative as "junk". And speaking of junk, take a look at corporate bonds. Those too are nearly all junk and we are about to have a second purge of junk bond lending as well.]

This bubble is exactly the result of both the Fed and Congress interfering against normal market forces. The market has now taken care of subprime lending (or rather is in the process of doing so) and any bills Congress passes at this point are just going to cause additional distortions. This idea was outlined in Malinvestments, Predatory Lending, and Demagogues.

It's high time Congress spares us the Dudley Do-Right Charge in favor of letting the market take care of it. But no! Congress never learns. Or perhaps I mean they have learned too well. To stay in power, Congress takes handouts from the financial industry (and every other industry that wants to buy legislation for that matter) while simultaneously attempting to buy votes from the public.

No doubt the inflationists will be all over this, but some sort of reaction by the Fed or government was predicted well in advance by me and most likely a few other deflationists as well. I have no doubt the Fed will be cutting interest rates as well. But as I have pointed out before, such interference policies work until they don't. I think we have finally reached the point where these policies will no more work here than they did in Japan.

Three Reasons Bailouts Will Fail

1. Consumers are going to be unable to take on more debt in the face of falling home prices.
2. A recession will force a cutback in consumer spending.
3. Credit will tighten up such that banks will be unwilling to lend given falling asset prices and rising credit risk.

Number 3 above is happening already and it will spread further. A significant repricing of both assets and risk will be the result. Unfortunately this tsunami is about to hit the baby boomers just as they think they are ready to retire.

Mike Shedlock / Mish
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/

 

 

 

 

dass Bernanke seinen "Helikopter" einsetzen wird. Meine Gründe:

1) Die Krise trifft hauptsächlich Arme. Das Establishment in Washington hat wie immer wenig Interesse denen zu helfen (siehe New Orleans)

2) Wahlen sind erst nächstes Jahr

3) Wäre er ziemlich wahnsinnig, die von ihm selbst erzeugte Kreditblase nochmals aufzublasen; jetzt wo endlich die Luft entweicht.

Nein, klüger wäre die FED, wenn sie einfach die Schwachen vor die Hunde gehen läßt (und mit ihnen zu gierige Hypotheken-Spekulaten) und wartet bis sich der Rauch verzogen hat.

Wenn Bernanke die Geldschleusen aufdrehen wird, dann sicher nur wenn es echte Anzeichen für eine Rezession gibt. Liegen die im Moment vor? Meines Wissens nicht, oder täusche ich mich da?

Servus, J.B.
--------------------------------------------------
"If any man seeks for greatness, let him forget greatness and ask for truth, and he will find both." (Horace Mann)

Da manche schon wieder von rennenden Bullen träumen...

Also alles was Heute passiert ist, war ganz normal und hat nix mit einer Erholung oder ähnlichem zu tun...

Der Dow ist einfach an der 200-Tage Linie, welche bei 11957 verlief, nach oben abgeprallt. Dieser Umstand ist nicht weiter verwunderlich, da solche Widerstände meist nicht beim ersten Mal geknackt werden....

Und Helikopter wird auch keiner kommen, da die Fed eh die Hose voll hat, denn die Kernrate ist allem Anschein nach schon wieder um 0,3% gestiegen...und das größere Übel wäre eine ausufernde Inflation...

Ausserdem würde es jetzt auch nix mehr nützen, denn die Lawine ist im Rollen, die Zwangsvorstreckungen sind im Laufen...wer sich sein Haus bei 5,25% nicht leisten kann, wird es sich auch bei 5% oder 4,75% nicht mehr leisten können....

Servus, J.B.
--------------------------------------------------
"If any man seeks for greatness, let him forget greatness and ask for truth, and he will find both." (Horace Mann)

Well, who does? The standard answer, seemingly true, was that they'd all been carved up and sold through various derivative instruments, so the risk was spread over a greater number of investors.

Oh, we all said. Those derivative markets are so hard to understand. The big boys like Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers know how to hedge against this stuff. And they'd never pass along bad goods, right?

So here we are this week at the popping of another great Wall Street myth; another big con that everybody -- even on the street -- bought into because the money was easy and the returns were great.

It wasn't like the media didn't try to do stories looking for signs of a turnaround. A piece about the prospect for banks, filed by MarketWatch's own Nick Godt back in September, looks remarkably prescient this week in its description of how the subprime lenders looked vulnerable. Read full story. Other media had similar warning stories.

But even the most pessimistic forecasts by people interviewed in these stories were offset by reassurances from the industry that everything was appropriately hedged.
In short, plenty of people worried this might happen but precious few were prepared to bet on it -- until now.

What's bizarre here is that the revelations of the problems in the mortgage market, caused by overaggressive selling as well as borrowing during the housing boom, are coming the same week as the elite of Wall Street gather to decry the state of financial regulation in this country as too restrictive, what with Sarbanes-Oxley and all that. Here we are in the middle of another self-induced financial implosion -- in a regulated industry by the way -- and the great minds are telling us that the answer is less regulation.

So just like with the Internet bubble, investors and in this case many home buyers are learning an expensive lesson about boom and bust. Each day subprime housing loan problems are turning up in new unexpected areas -- General Motors, H&R Block, specific mutual funds tied to real estate. The list will get larger and more unusual with each passing week.

These bad loans are out there -- and somebody owns them, or pieces of them. The search is on for who is holding the bag, be it subprime lenders, banks, investors in collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs, investment banks, GM (GM) and H&R Block (HRB), or maybe one of the mutual funds in your 401(K).

At the end of the day, the horrible reality is that in some way, we all own them. And it serves us right.

David Callaway is editor-in-chief of MarketWatch.

  
 War nur ein gedanke, aber Barclys weiss, was es heistt in schwierigkeiten zu stecken.....

 

mfg

ath


Donnerstag, 15. März 2007
Für New Century wirds enger
Barclays will ihr Geld zurück

Die Finanzlage der US-Hypothekenbank New Century Financial wird enger. Einer der Kreditgeber, die britische Barclays, habe rund 900 Mio. US-Dollar zurückverlangt, teilte die Bank mit Sitz in Irvine der US-Börsenaufsicht SEC mit. Damit wächst die Gefahr einer Insolvenz, mit der in Fachkreisen bereits seit einigen Tagen gerechnet wird.

Zudem hat New Century nach weiteren Angaben von vier US-Bundesstaaten Unterlassungsanordnungen erhalten. Demnach kann die Bank, die Hypotheken an Kunden mit schlechter Bonität (subprime) vergibt, in Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey und New York keine neue Kredite mehr vergeben. Die Gesellschaft hatte in der vergangenen Woche allerdings ohnehin angekündigt, keine neuen Mittel mehr herauslegen zu wollen.

New Century, im vergangenen Jahr die Nummer zwei am US-Subprime-Markt gemessen am Kreditvolumen, leidet unter der hohen Ausfallrate für Kredite dieser Art nach dem Ende des Baubooms und steht vor der Insolvenz. Zu ihren Geldgebern gehören außer Barclays unter anderem auch eine Tochter der Deutschen Bank und die schweizerische UBS.

Während des Booms auf dem US-Immobilienmarkt haben viele Käufer ihre Eigenheime mit Krediten vom Subprime-Markt finanziert, mit dem Ende der Preissteigerungen für die Wohnimmobilien können nun einige dieser Kredite nicht mehr bedient werden. In den vergangenen zwei Monaten haben bereits mehr als 20 unabhängige Immobilienfinanzierer Konkurs angemeldet.

Vor wenigen Tagen hatte New Century mitgeteilt, dass alle Geldgeber die Kreditlinien gekündigt hätten. New Century verfüge nicht über ausreichend Barmittel, um alle Verpflichtungen zu erfüllen. Sollten alle Gläubiger auf einer sofortigen Rückzahlung bestehen, dann müsste New Century an die 8,4 Mrd USD zurückzahlen. Es werde aber mit den Gläubigern und anderen möglichen Geldgebern über frische Mittel gesprochen. Allerdings gebe es keine Garantie, dass die Gespräche Erfolg haben werden.
Adresse:
www.n-tv.de/778627.html

jetzt günstig über die accredited zu finanzieren... ;-)


PS. noch jemand bei century short?

mfg
ath

aktueller kurs:

investorrelations.ncen.com/...&p=irol-stockQuote&news=accepted

...mit aller Gewalt am Leben halten:

Laut dem Analysten David Rosenberg von der Investmentbank Merrill Lynch dürften strengere Vorschriften zur Kreditvergabe unter Hypothekenfinanzierer für einen Rückgang der Hauspreise in 2007 um 10 Prozent sorgen. Dies würde mit einem Abgleiten der US-Wirtschaft in die Rezession verbunden sein. Zudem bestehe die Erwartung, dass der zweitgrößte US-Hypothekenfinanzierer New Century Financial und andere Hypothekenunternehmen in die Pleite schlittern, zumal die Zahl der säumigen Kreditkunden auf ein 4-Jahreshoch gestiegen ist. Selbst wenn verschärfte Regeln nur auf Schuldner mit geringer Bonität abzielen könnten diese mit weiteren signifikanten Rückgängen bei den Hauspreisen, im Bereich der Bauwirtschaft und im privaten Konsum einhergehen. Weitere Hauspreisrückgänge würden vor allem negative Einflüsse auf die Einnahmen für Möbelunternehmen und Haushaltsgerätehersteller hervorrufen und die Kupferpreise nach unten drücken. In der Folge würde die Arbeitslosenrate bis Jahresende auf über 5 Prozent steigen, was die Wahrscheinlichkeit einer Rezession auf nahezu 100 Prozent erhöhe, wenn nicht die Federal Reserve die Leitzinsen um 1 Prozentpunkte senkt.

( Besonders den letzten Satz kann man schon fast als Drohung auffassen....)

Wertzuwachs

IMO

hausgemacht.
...
mfg nf

Hier zur Abstimmung für den heutigen Tag:

http://www.ariva.de/board/285373/...ch_bitte_um_eure_Einschaetzung_zu

AKTIEN-FLASH: Deutsche Bank sehr fest - Berichte: Nicht von Krise betroffen
15.03.07 09:30

FRANKFURT (dpa-AFX Broker) - Aktien von der Deutschen Bank Chart Aufruf des Aktiennavigator-Porträts haben am Donnerstag nach dem kräftigen Kursverlust am Vortag 2,30 Prozent auf 93,60 Euro zugelegt. Medienberichten zufolge geht aus einem internen Papier des Finanzinstituts hervor, dass die Deutsche Bank der Krise am amerikanischen Hypotheken- und Immobilienmarkt gelassen entgegensieht, da sie keine ungesichterten Kredite an US-Hypothekeninstitute vergeben habe. Zudem stellt der Kursgewinn eine Erholung nach den Verlusten von mehr als 5 Prozent am Mittwoch dar. Händler hatten diese Kursreaktion als übertrieben bezeichnet./sc/mw ----------------------- dpa-AFX Broker - die Trader News im dpa-AFX ProFeed

Wenn wir eine Immobilienkreditkrise haben, gibts hohe Unterschiede im Bankensektor. Gerade Banken die keinen Cent in US Immobilien haben müssten steigen.

Haben wir aber eine Krise welche deutlich größer ist als das Immobilienthema müssten alle Banken betroffen sein

regards

Fred

15.03.2007 - 08:39
Merrill Lynch sieht große Gefahr einer Rezession      


 
Laut dem Analysten David Rosenberg von der Investmentbank Merrill Lynch dürften strengere Vorschriften zur Kreditvergabe unter Hypothekenfinanzierer für einen Rückgang der Hauspreise in 2007 um 10 Prozent sorgen. Dies würde mit einem Abgleiten der US-Wirtschaft in die Rezession verbunden sein. Zudem bestehe die Erwartung, dass der zweitgrößte US-Hypothekenfinanzierer New Century Financial und andere Hypothekenunternehmen in die Pleite schlittern, zumal die Zahl der säumigen Kreditkunden auf ein 4-Jahreshoch gestiegen ist. Selbst wenn verschärfte Regeln nur auf Schuldner mit geringer Bonität abzielen könnten diese mit weiteren signifikanten Rückgängen bei den Hauspreisen, im Bereich der Bauwirtschaft und im privaten Konsum einhergehen. Weitere Hauspreisrückgänge würden vor allem negative Einflüsse auf die Einnahmen für Möbelunternehmen und Haushaltsgerätehersteller hervorrufen und die Kupferpreise nach unten drücken. In der Folge würde die Arbeitslosenrate bis Jahresende auf über 5 Prozent steigen, was die Wahrscheinlichkeit einer Rezession auf nahezu 100 Prozent erhöhe, wenn nicht die Federal Reserve die Leitzinsen um 1 Prozentpunkte senkt.

(HC)

The Federal Reserve Flow of Funds data summarizes the holding of loans or, if the loans are securitized, the form of the security. For example, many life insurance companies invest both in whole loans for which they hold the mortgage note (and which appear in the Federal Reserve data under Life Insurance Companies) and in commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS), collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and other asset backed securities (ABS) for which the security trustees hold the notes (and which appear here under CMBS, CDO and other ABS issues).

Commercial banks continue to hold the largest share of commercial/multifamily mortgages, with almost $1.3 trillion, or 44 percent of the total. Many of the commercial mortgage loans reported by commercial banks however, are actually "commercial and industrial" loans to which a piece of commercial property has been pledged as collateral. It is the borrower's business income - not the income derived from the property's rents and leases - that drives the underwriting, pricing and performance of these loans. Since the other loans reported here are generally income property loans, meaning that the income primarily comes from rents, the commercial bank numbers are not comparable.

CMBS, CDO and other ABS pools are the second largest holders of commercial/multifamily mortgages, holding $630 billion, or 21 percent of the total. Life insurance companies hold $284 billion, or 10 percent of the total, and savings institutions hold $203 billion, or 7 percent of the total. Government Sponsored-Enterprises (GSEs) and Agency- and GSE-backed mortgage pools, including Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae, hold $140 billion in multifamily loans that support the mortgage-backed securities they issue (referred to here as Agency- and GSE-backed mortgage pools) and an additional $80 billion "whole" loans in their own portfolios, for a total share of 7 percent of outstanding commercial/multifamily mortgages. (As noted above, many life insurance companies, banks and the GSEs also purchase and hold a large number of CMBS, CDO and other ABS issues. These loans appear in the CMBS, CDO and other ABS category referenced above.)

MULTIFAMILY MORTGAGE DEBT OUTSTANDING

Looking just at multifamily mortgages, the GSEs and Ginnie Mae hold the largest share of multifamily mortgages, with $140 billion in Agency- and GSE-backed mortgage pools and $80 billion in their own portfolios - 30 percent of the total multifamily debt outstanding. They are followed by commercial banks with $160 billion, or 22 percent of the total; CMBS, CDO and other ABS issues with $103 billion, or 14 percent of the total; savings institutions with $96 billion, or 13 percent of the total; state and local governments with $61 billion, or 8 percent of the total; and life insurance companies with $45 billion, or 6 percent of the total.

CHANGES IN COMMERCIAL/MULTIFAMILY MORTGAGE DEBT OUTSTANDING DURING 2006

Between December 2005 and December 2006, commercial banks saw the largest increase in dollar terms in their holdings of commercial/multifamily mortgage debt - an increase of $161 billion, or 14 percent, which represents 48 percent of the total $333 billion increase. CMBS, CDO and other ABS issues increased their holdings of commercial/multifamily mortgages by $108 billion or 21 percent - representing 32 percent of the net increase in commercial/multifamily mortgage debt outstanding. Life insurance companies experienced a net increase of $17 billion or 7 percent.

In percentage terms, Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) saw the biggest increase in their holdings of commercial/multifamily mortgages - a jump of 36 percent - while private pension funds saw the biggest drop (a net change of -4 percent).

The $51 billion increase in multifamily mortgage debt outstanding during 2006 represents an 8 percent increase. In dollar terms, commercial banks saw the largest increase in their holdings of multifamily mortgage debt - an increase of $20 billion or 14 percent, which represents 39 percent of the total increase. CMBS issues saw an increase of $13 billion, or 15 percent, in their holdings.

In percentage terms, REITs recorded the biggest increase in their holdings of multifamily mortgages, 52 percent, while private pension funds saw the biggest drop, -5 percent. [Note that a large factor in the increase in commercial bank holdings and decrease in savings institution holdings is the decision by CitiBank to surrender two of its thrift charters and fold those operations into its national bank. This resulted in a move of CitiBank thrift mortgage holdings from the "savings institutions" category to "commercial bank category".]

CHANGES IN COMMERCIAL/MULTIFAMILY MORTGAGE DEBT OUTSTANDING DURING THE FOURTH QUARTER

In the fourth quarter of 2006, CMBS, CDO and other ABS issues saw the largest increase in dollar terms in their holdings of commercial/multifamily mortgage debt - an increase of $49 billion, or 8 percent, which represents 49 percent of the total $99 billion increase. Commercial banks increased their holdings of commercial/multifamily mortgages by $44 billion, or 4 percent - representing 44 percent of the net increase in commercial/multifamily mortgage debt outstanding.

In percentage terms, CMBS, CDOs and other ABS issues saw the biggest increase in their holdings of commercial/multifamily mortgages - a jump of 8 percent - while savings institutions saw the biggest drop (a net change of -4 percent).

The $15 billion increase in multifamily mortgage debt outstanding between the third and fourth quarters represents a two percent increase. In dollar terms, commercial banks saw the largest increase in their holdings of multifamily mortgage debt - an increase of $10 billion, or 7 percent, which represents 67 percent of the total increase. CMBS, CDO and other ABS issues increased their holdings of multifamily mortgage debt by $6 billion, or 7 percent.

In percentage terms, commercial banks recorded the biggest increase in their holdings of multifamily mortgages, 7 percent, while savings institutions saw the biggest drop, -8 percent.    

Häufig waren die Metallpreise in den vergangenen Monaten ein volaufender Indikator für die Börse.

Posting 19

http://www.ariva.de/board/285373/...eure_Einschaetzung_zu#jump3157178