• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Люди759
      • Показать ещё
      Компании1756
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы537
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации71
      • Показать ещё
      Издания203
      • Показать ещё
      Разное603
      • Показать ещё
      Формат32
      Показатели84
      • Показать ещё
      Сферы2
09 августа, 16:12

Another Financial Elite Goes on Record About the Bubble

Last week former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan warned that the bond market was a gigantic bubble waiting to burst. This week, another financial elite, Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan, has said the same thing. “I do think that bond prices are high,” the chief executive officer of JPMorgan Chase & Co. said Tuesday in an interview on CNBC. “I’m not going to call it a bubble, but I wouldn’t personally be buying 10-year sovereign debt anywhere around the world.” Source: Bloomberg This would be an ASTONISHING admission from ANY bank CEO. But coming from the CEO of JP Morgan, the single largest bank in the United States, it is truly incredible. As current CEO, Dimon has to be cautious in his statements (hence why he refused to outright call bonds “a bubble”). But he is openly admitting that when it comes to his PERSONAL capital, he wouldn’t touch 10-year SOVEREIGN bonds anywhere in the world. Why is this a big deal? Because sovereign bonds are the BEDROCK of the entire global financial system. They are the “risk-free” rate against which all risk assets are priced. So if sovereign bonds are in a bubble, every asset under the sun is in a bubble. And worse still, when the bond bubble bursts, we’re talking about ENTIRE COUNTRIES (not banks) going bust. Think what happened to Greece in 2010… for around the world. On top of this, the bond bubble is bigger than anything the world has ever seen. The housing bubble was about $14 trillion in size. This bubble is north of $100 TRILLION. You've been warned. We offer a FREE investment report outlining when the bubble will burst as well as what investments will pay out massive returns to investors when this happens. It's called The Biggest Bubble of All Time (and three investment strategies to profit from it). We made 1,000 copies to the general public. As I write this there are just 97 are left. To pick up your FREE copy... CLICK HERE! Best Regards Graham Summers Chief Market Strategist Phoenix Capital Research

03 августа, 22:50

How Banks Hurt The Real Economy - FDIC's Hoenig To Senate

  • 0

Authored by Wolf Richter via WolfStreet.com,  "The real economy has little to gain, and much to lose.” When tighter regulations were imposed on the banks after the Financial Crisis, the largest among them, the very ones that threatened to bring down the financial system, began squealing. Those voices are now being heard by Congress, which is considering deregulating the banks again. In particular, they claim that current capital requirements force banks to curtail their lending to businesses and consumers, and thus hurt the economy. Nonsense! That’s in essence what FDIC Vice Chairman Thomas Hoenig told Senate Banking Committee Chairman Mike Crapo and the committee’s senior Democrat, Sherrod Brown, in a letter dated Tuesday, according to Reuters. The senators are trying to find a compromise on bank deregulation. If banks wanted to increase lending, they could easily do so without lower capital requirements, Hoenig pointed out. Rather than blowing their income on share-buybacks or paying it out in form of dividends, banks could retain more of their income, thus adding it to regulatory capital. Capital absorbs the losses from bad loans. Higher capital levels make a bank more resilient during the next crisis. If there isn’t enough capital, the bank collapses and gets bailed out. But banks that increase their capital levels through retained earnings are stronger and can lend more. Alas, in the first quarter, the 10 largest bank holding companies in the US plowed over 100% of their earnings into share buybacks and dividends, he wrote. If they had retained more of their income, they could have boosted lending by $1 trillion. The CEO of the top bank on this list has been very vocal about plowing more of the bank’s income into share buybacks and dividends, while pushing regulators to lower capital requirements. In his “Dear Fellow Shareholders” letter in April, Jamie Dimon wrote under the heading “Regulatory Reform,” among many other things: “It is clear that the banks have too much capital.”   “And we think it’s clear that banks can use more of their capital to finance the economy without sacrificing safety and soundness. Had they been less afraid of potential CCAR stress losses, banks probably would have been more aggressive in making some small business loans, lower rated middle market loans and near-prime mortgages. But the government was preventing them from doing it, he suggested. This didn’t sit well with Hoenig apparently. He was president of the Kansas City Fed and member of the Fed’s policy-setting Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) from 1991 to 2011 – through the Financial Crisis. Observers of the Fed remember him wistfully as a one of the rare “hawks” on inflation. And, in his function at the FDIC, he’s not shy about being a thorn in the side of the biggest banks – though he is outclassed by the power of the biggest bank regulator, the Fed, which has a much more accommodating view of bank regulation. So Hoenig supplied some numbers in his letter. The largest bank on his list, JPMorgan Chase, earned $26 billion over the four quarters. But it plowed $27.6 billion – or 106% of its income – into share-buybacks and dividends. If it had retained that income, it would have raised its capital by that amount, and it would have been enough to make an additional $250 billion of loans under current capital rules. In total, the 10 largest banks combined, on an annualized basis, will plow 99% of their earnings into share-buybacks and dividends. Share-buybacks alone amount to $83 billion (not counting dividends). Under existing capital rules, if the banks were to retain this capital instead of buying their own shares with it, they could have increased commercial and consumer loans by $741 billion. And they could have still paid out their big dividends. If they cut their dividend payments some, they could have boosted their lending by over $1 trillion. “I can only caution against relaxing current capital requirements and allowing the largest banks to increase their already highly leveraged positions,” Hoenig wrote.   “The real economy has little to gain, and much to lose, by doing so.”   “While distributing all of today’s income to shareholders may be received well in the short run, it can undermine their future returns and weaken the growth outlook for the larger economy,” he wrote.   “I recognize that dividends are an important factor for investors and they should be rewarded for the risks they take. But it is also true that funding business growth, assuring future economic success, and promoting capitalism depend upon the retention of earnings,” he wrote. What is it that makes me think that his reasoning and pleas will once again fall on deaf ears? Is it the fact that banks, including Goldman Sachs, have aggressively schmoozed with Congress and staffed essential parts of the administration? Something tells me that Hoenig will be once again shunted to a sidetrack and forgotten. And the number three on the list, Wells Fargo, is now in the middle of a new scandal: another 570,000 (or 800,000?) customers become victims. Read…  It Just Doesn’t Let Up with Wells Fargo

29 июля, 15:55

ФРГ: экстерриториальность санкций США недопустима

Москва, 28 июля - "Вести.Экономика". Эксперты Института международных финансов (IIF) сравнили потенциальные действия Федеральной резервной системы США по сокращению объема активов на своем балансе с конвенциальным ужесточением монетарной политики.

28 июля, 20:55

Снижение баланса ФРС сравнили с повышением ставок

Эксперты Института международных финансов сравнили потенциальные действия Федеральной резервной системы США по сокращению объема активов на своем балансе с конвенциальным ужесточением монетарной политики.

28 июля, 20:55

Снижение баланса ФРС сравнили с повышением ставок

Эксперты Института международных финансов сравнили потенциальные действия Федеральной резервной системы США по сокращению объема активов на своем балансе с конвенциальным ужесточением монетарной политики.

Выбор редакции
25 июля, 10:55

Bill Black: Jamie Dimon, You Make Us Embarrassed to be Americans

If Dimon really wants to know why growth is so slow his research should begin by looking in the mirror.

24 июля, 15:00

Property Market In Dublin Is Inflated and May Burst Again

Commercial Property Market Is Inflated and May Burst Again by David McWilliams Dublin property investors had better hope that Brexit happens soon. They should also hope that it’s not just a ‘hard’ Brexit, but a granite Brexit — a Brexit that’s as hard as possible. They should be betting on the buffoonery of Boris Johnson, down on both knees praying for a massive barney between Davis and Barnier. A granite Brexit might prompt the migration of hundreds of corporate refugees from isolated London to the freewheeling safe haven of Dublin. If Brexit doesn’t drive a massive uptake in demand for prime property, we are in for a massive wobble in our inflated commercial property market. Before we remind ourselves how this property story goes, let’s have a look at the facts: the glossy brochures are back, stockbrokers are packaging all sorts of property-related products to “investors”, the price of ad space in the property porn sections of the press is surging and of course the skyline is full of cranes and Armagh flags. CBRE – a property-flogging outfit – tells us there are currently 31 office schemes under construction in Dublin, which is more than 380,000sqm in the pipeline. They tell us that more than 30% of this stock is already let. It also gushes that 44% of the office stock due for completion before the end of this year has already been pre-let. Meanwhile, agents tell us that prime office rents in the Dublin market stand at approximately €673 sqm. It looks like things couldn’t be healthier. Office take-up in Dublin surged 101,000sqm in the past three months, bringing total take-up in the first half of this year to more than 150,000 sqm. That’s a lot of space. 81 individual large office lettings were signed in Dublin since March (45 to Irish companies; 18 to US firms and 11 to the Brits). This is more than double the figure for the period from January to March. The market is tight, hence all the building. The vacancy rate in the city centre is only 4.5% and yields for investors are stable at 4.6%. This is only because rents have been surging to keep up with the soaring prices. Before we get carried away, remember rents are a cost and Ireland is competing with other European countries, so let’s compare our prices, not with some of Europe’s poorest countries, but why not with its richest, Germany? This will give a bit of perspective. Comparing our prices with similar rents in Germany, we see that Dublin is already massively more expensive. Prime rents in Frankfurt are €474 sqm per annum. Remember Dublin is charging €673 sqm. The difference — €199 per annum — means that Dublin is 42% more expensive than Germany’s most expensive city. Once you start comparing other German cities, the extent of Ireland’s commercial property rip-off becomes more evident. Take Munich, capital city of Germany’s richest province Bavaria. Prime rents in Munich are €420 sqm per annum. In Hamburg, Germany’s sophisticated northern powerhouse, prime rents are €312 sqm per annum, while in Dusseldorf, the cross-road of Europe, prime real estate will set you back €318 sqm per annum – less than half of what it costs you in Dublin. In all German markets, vacancy rates are higher so that means there’s much more choice. When the price of something as basic as office space is profoundly more expensive in a country that has a much lower economic footprint, much smaller population and less rich capital base, you should worry. The rebound in the Dublin commercial property market has been significant... (see chart above) ... Meanwhile the foreign investors have got out with their profit and the Irish are left thinking they can get rich by selling Ireland to each other. Wait, haven’t we seen this before? Maybe Brexit will ensure a happy ending this time? Dublin’s Commercial Market Praying for a Granite-Brexit - Read in full here   News and Commentary Gold hits 4-week high on weaker equities, U.S. dollar (Reuters.com) IMF cuts U.S. growth forecast for 2017, 2018 (MarketWatch.com) Stocks to Edge Lower Before Earnings Flurry, Fed (Bloomberg.com) Stocks brace for volatility in earnings deluge; Fed meeting looms (MarketWtch.com) Charges dropped after ‘London Whale’ accused Jamie Dimon of making him a fall guy (MarketWatch.com) Source: US Funds “Mother of All Bubbles” Keeps Gold in Focus (AdvisorPerspectives.com) Can You Guess the World’s Largest Gold Jewelry Market? (Fool.com) The Student Loan Bubble and Economic Collapse (AntoniusAquinas.com) Former 'Plunge Protection Team' Member Warns "Blockchain Is Freaking Governments Out" (ZeroHedge.com) Deeply flawed Western economic models undermining worst global recovery in history (CNBC.com) Gold Prices (LBMA AM) 24 Jul: USD 1,255.85, GBP 962.99 & EUR 1,077.64 per ounce21 Jul: USD 1,247.25, GBP 958.89 & EUR 1,071.39 per ounce20 Jul: USD 1,236.55, GBP 953.63 & EUR 1,075.06 per ounce19 Jul: USD 1,239.85, GBP 950.84 & EUR 1,074.83 per ounce18 Jul: USD 1,237.10, GBP 949.47 & EUR 1,071.82 per ounce17 Jul: USD 1,229.85, GBP 940.71 & EUR 1,074.03 per ounce14 Jul: USD 1,218.95, GBP 940.54 & EUR 1,067.92 per ounce Silver Prices (LBMA) 24 Jul: USD 16.50, GBP 12.66 & EUR 14.17 per ounce21 Jul: USD 16.43, GBP 12.63 & EUR 14.11 per ounce20 Jul: USD 16.18, GBP 12.50 & EUR 14.07 per ounce19 Jul: USD 16.23, GBP 12.44 & EUR 14.08 per ounce18 Jul: USD 16.17, GBP 12.41 & EUR 13.99 per ounce17 Jul: USD 16.07, GBP 12.30 & EUR 14.02 per ounce14 Jul: USD 15.71, GBP 12.11 & EUR 13.76 per ounce Recent Market Updates - Gold Hedges Against Currency Devaluation and Cost Of Fuel, Food, Beer and Housing- Millennials Can Punt On Bitcoin, Own Gold and Silver For Long Term- “Time To Position In Gold Is Right Now” says Jim Rickards- Bloomberg Silver Price Survey – Median 12 Month Forecast Of $20- “Bigger Systemic Risk” Now Than 2008 – Bank of England- “Financial Crisis” Coming By End Of 2018 – Prepare Urgently- Video – “Gold Should Probably Be $5000” – CME Chairman- India Gold Imports Surge To 5 Year High – 220 Tons In May Alone- “Silver’s Plunge Is Nearing Completion”- China, Russia Alliance Deepens Against American Overstretch- Silver Prices Bounce Higher After Futures Manipulated 7% Lower In Minute- Precious Metals Are “Best Defence” Against Bail-ins In Economic Crisis- Buy Gold Near $1,200 “As Insurance” – UBS Wealth  "It is important to note that all portfolios under all conditions actually perform better with exposure to gold and silver" - David Morgan   In the short video above, David Morgan, the Silver Guru, speaks briefly about the importance of owning silver bullion coins and bars as financial insurance in an uncertain world. He speaks about GoldCore Secure Storage and how he recommends GoldCore's ultra secure allocated and segregated gold, silver, platinum and palladium bullion storage (Zurich, London, Singapore and Hong Kong) to his retail and high net worth clients.  

23 июля, 14:08

Jamie Dimon Is Frustrated With D.C.? He Should Have Known Better

It's time to downgrade: Donald Trump and the GOP-controlled Congress have had the political equivalent of six months of bad earnings reports and declining sales.

21 июля, 23:23

US Drops Criminal Charges Against JPM "London Whale" Traders As It Is "Unable To Extradite Them"

In the latest confirmation that "justice" in the US has become a sordid farce when it comes to the banking elite, moments ago the following two headlines from Reuters hit: U.S. DECIDES TO DROP CRIMINAL CHARGES AGAINST FORMER JPMORGAN TRADERS JAVIER MARTIN-ARTAJO, JULIEN GROUT IN 'LONDON WHALE' CASE U.S. SAYS DEFENDANTS LIVE OUTSIDE THE COUNTRY AND HAVE REFUSED TO DEFEND THEMSELVES IN NEW YORK, AND EFFORTS TO EXTRADITE THEM HAVE BEEN UNSUCCESSFUL OR DEEMED FUTILE Er, what: So just because two alleged criminal bankers "live outside the US" (not some 3rd world backwater dictatorship but Spain, with which the US has an extradition treaty) and "voluntarily" refuse to come to New York to defend themselves and - well - go to prison, and because the US is completely powerless to compel Spain to deliver these two men, they get to walk? Yes, pretty much. Here is the backstory: Martin-Artajo and Grout were indicted in 2013 on five counts, including securities fraud, wire fraud and conspiracy.   Prosecutors said the duo hid losses within JPMorgan's chief investment office in London by marking positions in a credit derivatives portfolio at inflated prices. Those losses were part of an overall $6.2 billion trading loss suffered by the bank centered on Bruno Iksil, the former trader known as the London Whale. Martin-Artajo supervised Iksil, while Grout worked for Iksil. Both men deny wrongdoing. In 2013, JPMorgan agreed to pay more than $1 billion to settle U.S. and British regulatory probes into the London Whale losses and admitted wrongdoing.   * * *  U.S. prosecutors said their efforts to extradite from Spain a former JPMorgan Chase & Co executive charged in connection with the bank's $6.2 billion "London Whale" scandal had hit a dead end. In a filing in Manhattan federal court [in May 2015], prosecutors said Spanish authorities have decided not to appeal an April 23 ruling by a court rejecting the extradition to the United States of Javier Martin-Artajo, a Spanish citizen.   Former JPMorgan employee Javier Martin-Artajo (C), indicted by a U.S. grand jury in relation to the bank's "London Whale"   The filing came in a civil lawsuit brought in 2013 by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission against Martin-Artajo and another trader, Julien Grout, who were charged criminally at the same time. The Spanish court's decision effectively has left both men out of U.S. prosecutors' reach. Grout lives in France, which does extradite its own citizens.    The SEC in its own letter on Thursday said the men, who would likely invoke their Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, are not willing to be deposed, and Martin-Artajo's lawyer has said any deposition must be in Europe.   With extradition off the table, prosecutors under Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said they no longer are seeking to delay depositions in the SEC's case. This is the same Preet who was so busy doing everything in his power to avoid prosecuting any and all Wall Street bankers, that he is now one of the leaders of the anti-Trump "resistance." Oh, and just to preserve some semblance of credibility as it washes its hands, here is the DOJ scapegoating Bruno Iksil, the original London Whale trader, who recently put up a website laying out his side of the story and who blamed Jamie Dimon for the London Whale fiasco. U.S. SAYS NO LONGER BELIEVES IT CAN RELY ON TESTIMONY OF BRUNO IKSIL, A FORMER JPMORGAN COLLEAGUE, IN PROSECUTING MARTIN-ARTAJO AND GROUT Because anytime someone dares to break away from the "syndicate", and tells the actual truth, they can no longer be relied upon. Meanwhile, we hope Kim Dot Com is paying attention...

21 июля, 20:06

Brexit woe: London’s still calling U.S. bankers even as they prepare to flee

Nord Anglia International School Dublin is not even scheduled to open until September 2018, but its slots are already going fast thanks to some of the wealthiest foreigners in the region: American bankers.Three U.S. banks operating in London have contacted the school in Ireland about the prospect of enrolling their employees’ children. One bank this month asked for 50 slots — which go for an average of 20,000 euros, or $23,000, a pop, said project manager David Quigley. Britain’s decision to leave the European Union has left American banks in London scrambling to implement contingency plans to relocate to the continent so they can continue to serve clients there. Trouble is, many bankers are reluctant to leave what has long been Europe’s uncontested financial capital.While the Brexit negotiations between the U.K. and EU only began last month, the banks are initiating plans to move thousands of jobs out of London even as they simultaneously fight to preserve the status quo as much as possible in The City.On Thursday an official with TheCityUK, a trade group representing U.S. megabanks such as Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, met with Prime Minister Theresa May to advocate for a business-friendly Brexit. Among the requests: a transition period that would give businesses more time to prepare.Bankers are increasingly anxious that Brexit will end badly and force them to carry out their costly relocation plans. “We are lobbying very hard for an orderly Brexit,” said a London-based banker at an American firm.Some 500 U.S.-based financial services firms operate in London. Switzerland is a distant second with one-tenth as many. Of the 222 largest firms with significant operations in Britain, about 27 percent are expecting to move staff out of the U.K or are reviewing their plans, according a report this month by Ernst & Young. At least 22 investment banks have declared their intention to move some staff or operations, with Frankfurt and Dublin tied for first place, followed by Paris.JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon visited Dublin and Paris this month. The bank, the biggest in the U.S. by assets, recently bought new offices on Dublin’s River Liffey.“We do know other U.S. groups sent in their real estate teams to Dublin,” said Kieran Donoghue, head of international financial services for IDA Ireland, an Irish government agency. “It is not confined to JPMorgan.”IDA’s clients include Bank of New York Mellon, Citi, Morgan Stanley and BlackRock, he said.On Friday, Bank of America became the latest big U.S. bank to pick Dublin as the post-Brexit location for some of its employees. The company did not divulge the number of people who might be relocated there and said it will move some employees to other EU locations as well. But while U.S. businesses are listening to the European cities’ sales pitches, most are more interested in staying in London, partly because moving staff is an expensive process.Aside from the relocation cost, however, some bankers grimace when they talk about the prospect of moving to Europe and rattle off complaints about The City’s suitors: Dublin lacks good primary schools. Paris has stringent labor regulations and taxes. And Frankfurt? Too small and boring.“One banker said to me recently, ‘There’s only one opera house in Frankfurt,’” said a London-based consultant who is working with financial companies preparing for Brexit moves.That’s not deterring Citigroup. In an email to staff on Thursday, Citigroup’s head of Europe said the giant U.S. bank will open a second trading hub in Frankfurt. Up to 150 new positions may need to be established in the EU, but London will remain Citi’s regional headquarters, according to the email obtained by POLITICO.Morgan Stanley is also expected to expand its presence in Frankfurt by about 200 jobs, according to press reports on Wednesday. A spokesman for the bank declined to comment. Paris is fighting for U.S. Brexit business, too.In addition to trumpeting President Emmanuel Macron’s proposals to ease France's labor regulations and cut taxes, the city is trying to promote itself as a leading space for financial technology firms such as app developers for banks.Paris Europlace, a lobbying group for the city whose members include JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs, is highlighting a massive new workspace for startups that opened in July called “Station F.” A Silicon Valley-based startup accelerator, Plug and Play, is opening an office there in September, with U.S. fintech businesses among its clients.Charles LaBelle, an associate director of employer engagement at INSEAD, a Fontainebleau-based business school, said students have been asking financial companies about Brexit, but “the answer is always business-as-usual.” Recent INSEAD graduates have gone to work for Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and other U.S. firms. And in what city do they most want to work? “London is the draw,” LaBelle said. “What we hear from students when we survey them coming in, London is always one of the top three destinations where they want to land.”Still, U.S. companies are assuming that London’s reputation as a financial center will take a hit after Brexit. Miles Celic, TheCityUK’s CEO, said his group is going around Europe to plead its case for a favorable Brexit with lawmakers, including one recently with the members of Germany’s legislative finance committee.“There is absolutely no sense of complacency,” Celic said.

21 июля, 17:47

Bank of America выбрал новый финансовый хаб в ЕС

Еще один крупный мировой банк определился, куда переведет свою европейскую штаб-квартиру после Брекзита. Bank of America выбрал для себя новый финансовый хаб в Дублине. Туда из Лондона переедет подразделение банка по рыночным операциям.

21 июля, 17:47

Bank of America выбрал новый финансовый хаб в ЕС

Еще один крупный мировой банк определился, куда переведет свою европейскую штаб-квартиру после Брекзита. Bank of America выбрал для себя новый финансовый хаб в Дублине. Туда из Лондона переедет подразделение банка по рыночным операциям.

20 июля, 00:16

Gradually... And Then Suddenly

Authored by Ben Hunt via Epsilon Theory blog, What do socialism and modern monetary policy have in common? Magical thinking. For both, it’s true on the giddy years up, and it’s true on the sad years down. If you’ve been reading my notes immediately before and after the June Fed meeting (“Tell My Horse” and “Post-Fed Follow-up”), you know that I think we now have a sea change in what the Fed is focused on and what their default course of action is going to be. Rather than looking for reasons to ease up on monetary policy and be more accommodative, the Fed and the ECB (and even the BOJ in their own weird way) are now looking for reasons to tighten up on monetary policy and be more restrictive. As Jamie Dimon said the other day, the tide that’s been coming in for eight years is now starting to go out. Caveat emptor. The question, then, isn’t whether the barge of monetary policy has turned around and embarked on a tightening course — it has — the question is how fast that barge is going to move AND whether or not the market pays more attention to the actual barge movements than what the barge captain says. I promise you that the barge captains of both the Fed and the ECB believe they can tighten and taper without killing the market so long as they jawbone this constantly. This is the Common Knowledge Game in action, this is the Missionary Effect, this is Communication Policy … this is everything that I’ve been writing about in Epsilon Theory over the past four years! And as we saw with the market’s euphoric reaction to Yellen’s prepared remarks for her Humphrey-Hawkins testimony last Wednesday, which were presented as oh-so dovish when they really weren’t, this jawboning strategy could absolutely work. It WILL absolutely work unless and until we get undeniably “hot” inflation numbers — particularly wage inflation numbers — from the real world. So what’s up with that? How can we have wage inflation running at a fairly puny 2.5% (Chart 1 below) when the unemployment rate is a crazy low 4.3% (Chart 2 below) and other indicators, like the NFIB’s survey of “Small Business Job Openings Hard to Fill” (Chart 3 below) are similarly screaming for higher wages? Chart 1: US Average Hourly Earnings, annual % change Source: Bloomberg Finance L.P. as of 7/13/17. For illustrative purposes only. Chart 2: US Unemployment Rate Source: Bloomberg Finance L.P. as of 7/13/17. For illustrative purposes only. Chart 3: NFIB Small Business Job Openings Hard to Fill Source: Bloomberg Finance L.P. as of 7/13/17. For illustrative purposes only. The answer, I think, can be found in Chart 4 below: vanishing labor productivity. Productivity is the amount of stuff that workers make (output) divided by the amount of time it takes them to make it (hours worked). You can have productivity growth for good reasons like in the 1980s and 1990s and early 2000s (more stuff made per hour worked as companies invested in things like the personal computer or the Internet) or bad reasons like in 2009 and 2010 (massive layoffs, so making a bit less stuff but over waaay fewer hours worked). Productivity growth for the right reasons (I know, I sound like a contestant on The Bachelorette) is just about the most important economic goal that policy makers have, because it’s how you get your economy growing in a sustainable, non-inflationary way, and for the past seven years we’ve had none of it. By the way, if new technologies were really responsible for keeping wage inflation down (something I hear all the time), we would have seen that through increasing labor productivity. We haven’t. Chart 4: US Labor Productivity Growth (2-year moving average) Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics as of 7/13/17. For illustrative purposes only. This is a huge question for the Fed, maybe the biggest question they have. How is it possible — with the most accommodative monetary policy in the history of the world, with the easiest money to borrow that corporations have ever experienced, with all the amazing technological advancements that we read about day in and day out — that companies have not invested more in plant and equipment and technology to improve their labor productivity, to make more with the people they’ve got? The answer, of course, is the answer that the Fed will never admit. The reason companies aren’t investing more aggressively in plant and equipment and technology is BECAUSE we have the most accommodative monetary policy in the history of the world, with the easiest money to borrow that corporations have ever seen. Why in the world would management take the risk — and it’s definitely a risk — of investing for real growth when they are so awash in easy money that they can beat their earnings guidance with a risk-free stock buyback? Why in the world would management take the risk — and it’s definitely a risk — of investing for GAAP earnings when they are so awash in easy money that they can hit their pro forma narrative guidance by simply buying profitless revenue? Why in the world would companies take any risk at all when the Fed has eliminated any and all negative consequences for playing it safe? It’s like going to a college where grade inflation makes an A- the average grade. Sure, I could bust a gut to get that A, but why would I do that? How does this apply to wage inflation? It’s the same thing. Why in the world would a company pay up to fill a position when it’s a risk they really don’t need to take? Yeah, we’ve got job openings, and yeah, our skill positions are increasingly going unfilled, and yeah, we’d like to expand and grow … I suppose. But, hey, we’re hitting our numbers just fine as it stands and, if you hadn’t noticed, our stock price hit a new high yesterday. Why mess up a good thing? How does this change? As the Fed slowly raises rates, as the barge slowly chugs down the tightening river, it will force companies to play it less safe. It will force companies to take on more risk. It will force companies to invest more in plant and equipment and technology. It will force companies to pay up for the skilled workers they need. You want wage inflation? You want productivity growth? Then raise rates! And god forbid if we actually get a tax reform bill passed. That’s the off-to-the-races moment. My point is a simple one. In exactly the same way that QE was deflationary in practice when it was inflationary in theory, so will the end of QE be inflationary in practice when it is deflationary in theory. That’s the real world impact I’m talking about, the world of wages and output and productivity. You know, the real world that used to be the touchstone of our markets. And here’s my other point. In the Bizarro-world that central bankers have created over the past eight years, raising rates isn’t going to have the same inflation-dampening effect that it’s had in past tightening cycles, at least not until you get to much higher rates than you have today. It’s going to accelerate inflation by forcing risk-taking in the real world, which means that the barge is going to have to move faster and faster the more it moves at all. I think that today’s head-scratcher for the world’s central banks — why haven’t our easy money policies created inflation in the real world? — will soon be replaced by a new head-scratcher — why haven’t our tighter money policies tamed inflation in the real world? My view: as the tide of QE goes out, the tide of inflation comes in. And the more that the QE tide recedes, the more inflation comes in. I know that this sounds like a nutty scenario today, with everyone talking about how inflation is dead and gone, and how the Fed will be “fighting” inflation by raising rates, but I gotta call ‘em like I see ‘em. It’s a scenario that neither central banks nor markets have contemplated in any serious way, but it’s going to be a focus for Epsilon Theory.

20 июля, 00:00

The Real Reason Jamie Dimon Went Berserk

William Cohan, Vanity FairNothing quite epitomizes Wall Street’s profound schizophrenia about Washington these days better than Jamie Dimon’s impromptu, Bastille Day, profanity-laced screed directed toward Congress and Donald Trump’s administration. Nearly immediately, the speechaccrued its own nickname: The Rant. And for good reason, since Dimon, the oft-genial C.E.O. of JPMorgan Chase, basically lost his temper on an earnings call.

19 июля, 22:30

El-Erian Exposes The Good, The Bad, & The Ugly Of Trumponomics

Authored by Mohamed El-Erian via The Financial Times, As we near the six-month mark of Donald Trump’s presidency, the US economy continues to create lots of jobs but is yet to unleash its full economic potential. It is an evolving economic record that points to the opportunities and challenges facing the administration. The good: growth focus President Trump’s economic narrative has focused the debate on the importance of increasing economic growth to 3-4 per cent annually, and of ensuring that the benefits accrue to many more segments of the population. To this end, the administration has identified three economic pro-growth policy priorities: tax reform, deregulation, and infrastructure. Also consistent with the growth objective, Mr Trump has stepped back from the protectionist threats advanced during the election campaign. There has been no dismantling of the Nafta trade agreement, no crippling tariffs on China and no cancellation of bilateral trade agreements. As a consequence, measures of household and corporate sentiment, including consumer confidence, have surged concurrent with the multiyear improvement in balance sheets. A Bloomberg national poll published this week shows that 58 per cent of American surveyed feel they are getting closer to meeting their “career and financial aspirations”, a level that this poll started in February 2013 has registered just once before. Yet all this remains to be reflected in “hard” data and Mr Trump’s ambitious growth objectives remain elusive. The less positive aspects of the record explain why. The bad: implementation delays While policy design has been progressing despite staffing issues, implementation has lagged behind, with the exception of deregulation. The administration will miss its initial August deadline for tax reform. and the infrastructure plans are incomplete. This amplifies the challenges Mr Trump faces in securing rapid congressional passage. Design complexity is certainly an issue, especially for a tax regime that, unreformed since the mid-1980s, is riddled with distortions. Important pro-growth tax reform elements, on which many politicians from both parties are likely to agree, are obfuscated by overly ambitious plans for upfront cuts in tax rates, especially for the better-off who have already significantly increased their share of national income, wealth and economic opportunities. The infrastructure component — itself subject to tricky design issues, including the appropriate role for public-private partnerships — will falter unless (and until) there is consensus on key budget parameters, including the extent to which the deficit may be increased without raising debt sustainability concerns. The administration has not helped the situation by putting the even more complex and divisive issue of healthcare before Congress ahead of important economic matters. Add to that Russia-related distractions and the economy faces the risk of completing its first year without passing key economic legislation. Also, the policy trio (tax reform, deregulation and infrastructure) constitutes only foundation stones for the comprehensive policy effort needed to generate a high and sustainable rise in more inclusive economic growth. It needs to be supplemented by further efforts to enhance productivity, including improving the functioning of current and future labour forces through better education, skill acquisition, retooling and retraining. The ugly: global policy co-ordination The recent growth pick-up in China, Europe and Japan improves the global context for the US economy. But secular sustainability is in question. Moreover, as illustrated by this month’s G20 summit in Germany, global policy co-ordination falls far short of what is needed to address the growing list of shared problems and strained inter-connectiveness. Part of this problem relates to the erosion of America’s global standing, credibility and leadership role — a point that Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan’s chief executive, highlighted during the company’s conference call last Friday. The longer this situation persists, the greater the fragmentation pressures on the global economy, including the emergence of regional orders that may ultimately be detrimental to the US economy. Six months is, of course, too short a time to reach a definitive judgment on any administration’s economic record. But it has been instructive in highlighting the potential of the economy and the challenges it faces. This balance risks being tipped unfavourably should Congress and the administration fail not just to reach timely agreement on tax reform and infrastructure, but also subsequently to build quickly on the pro-growth foundation.

Выбор редакции
19 июля, 19:45

Morgan Stanley выбрал новый торговый хаб в Европе

Американский банк Morgan Stanley переносит свою европейскую штаб-квартиру в Германию. По информации агентства Bloomberg, компания планирует переместить свой европейский брокерский бизнес из Лондона во Франкфурт-на-Майне.

19 июля, 19:45

Morgan Stanley выбрал новый торговый хаб в Европе

Американский банк Morgan Stanley переносит свою европейскую штаб-квартиру в Германию. По информации агентства Bloomberg, компания планирует переместить свой европейский брокерский бизнес из Лондона во Франкфурт-на-Майне.

19 июля, 19:39

New York's DiNapoli asks Dimon to back off a proxy reform

BOSTON (Reuters) - JPMorgan Chase & Co CEO Jamie Dimon, who has faced tough shareholder resolutions, is being asked to save them.

18 июля, 19:57

Why Republicans should listen to Jamie Dimon: trader

Banks released their second round of earnings today, as Goldman Sachs (GS) and Bank of America (BAC) reported second quarter results. The shocker was a surprise lecture from JPM CEO Jamie Dimon, which is especially relevant today, as the Republicans’ vow to replace Obamacare hit a dead end, leaving only the repeal option on the table. Jamie Dimon launched an all-out attack on Washington gridlock, incensed by the partisan divide he feels has held back the economy.

01 декабря 2016, 06:45

Команда Трампа. Голдман Сакс снова на коне

Дональд Трамп объявил имя будущего министра финансов США: им станет Стивен Тёрнер Мнучин (Steven Terner Mnuchin). Для кого-то это явилось неожиданностью. Ведь среди претендентов на высокий пост называли исполнительного директора банка JPMorgan Джейми Даймона, члена палаты представителей Джеба Хенсарлинга... У Стивена Мнучина, однако, было важное преимущество: в предвыборной кампании Трампа он работал финансовым менеджером. Кроме того, что...

07 января 2015, 14:33

Во время 9/11 Дик Чейни был не там, как это он утверждал официально.

Напомню, что я - аналитик и подборка информации идет соответственно- аналитическая, предполагающее самостоятельное изучение материалов.сначала с вами вспомним как звучит официально:Википедия:9:32: Диспетчеры аэропорта Даллеса в Виргинии наблюдают «цель на первичном обзорном радаре, двигающуюся с высокой скоростью в восточном направлении», относя это к рейсу 77.9:33 до 9:34: Руководитель башни аэропорта Рейган сообщает центру Секретной Службы Белого дома, что «в вашу сторону летит самолёт, который не выходит с нами на связь.» имея в виду рейс 77. Белый дом готовится к эвакуации, когда башня сообщает, что рейс 77 повернул, и заходит на посадку в аэропорт Рейган.9:34: Командный центр ФАА передает штаб-квартире ФАА имеющуюся информацию о рейсе 93.9:37: Вице-президент Чейни направляется в подземный бункер по туннелю.9:37:46: Рейс 77 врезается в западное крыло здания Пентагона, отчего начинается сильный пожар. Это крыло Пентагона находится на ремонте, и большинство офисов в нём не заняты. Погибают все 64 человека на борту и 125 человек в здании.1 канал, Россия:В 8:46 первый самолет врезался в северную башню Всемирного торгового центра в Нью-Йорке. Мэр города и руководитель службы спасения немедленно выехали к башням-близнецам. "Подъехав к торговому центру, мы убедились, что все намного хуже, чем мы думали, - рассказывает мэр Нью-Йорка в 2001 году Рудольф Джулиани. - Мы пытались дозвониться до начальника полиции, начальника пожарного департамента, даже до Белого дома. Но сотовая связь почти не работала".В 9:03 в южную башню Всемирного торгового центра врезался второй самолет. После этого первым лицам США стало понятно, что это нападение на страну. Президенту Бушу доложили о втором самолете.В этот момент новость о втором самолете получили журналисты президентского пула. Встреча со школьниками подошла к концуПервый звонок Буша – вице-президенту Дику Чейни. Они обсудили, с какими словами президент должен обратиться к нации. Оба понимали, что это террористический акт и они обязаны об этом сказать.В то время как президент завершал свое обращение к нации, в Центре управления ПВО возникла новая кризисная ситуация. Был замечен самолет в 10 километрах к востоку от Белого дома. При угрозе нападения на Вашингтон Белый дом должен быть немедленно эвакуирован. "Я работал за своим столом, когда в кабинет ворвался один из руководителей охраны. Он приказал следовать за ним без каких-либо объяснений. Потом одной рукой схватил меня за ремень, а другой за плечо и буквально вынес меня из кабинета сначала в коридор, а потом в туннель, ведущий в подземный оперативный центр", - вспоминает Дик Чейни.Оперативный центр находится в бункере. Он предназначен для управления страной в случае начала ядерной войны. Отсюда Чейни мог руководить организацией обороны страны и подготовкой ответного удара. Задача №1 – нейтрализация рейса 77 American Airlines, взявшего курс на Вашингтон.В 9:37 третий угнанный самолет врезался в здание Пентагона. В это время министр обороны Дональд Рамсфелд находился в своем рабочем кабинете. Выйдя на улицу, чтобы оценить ситуацию, он увидел пламя, дым и раненых и бросился помогать пострадавшим. Почти полчаса его не могли найти. Но затем он вернулся в свой кабинет, чтобы связаться с президентом и вице-президентомА теперь обращаемся к всежим американским источникам, коим является ранее мною упоминаемая согласительная комиссия по альтернативному (официальной точке зрения) расследованию этой трагедии. Ранее она находила свидетелей, которые утверждали,что черные ящики от врезавшихся самолетов в ВТЦ, были найдены: Новые доказательства отрицают,что не были найдены черные ящики самолетов.Пожарные, работающие в Граунд Зеро, утверждают,что были найдены три из четырех черных ящиков, так как они находятся в коробках, которые практически не поддаются разрушению. Эта информация была предоставлена согласительной комиссии из 24 членов по 9/11.Сейчас эта же комиссия утверждает,что слова Дика Чейни расходятся с показаниями свидетелей:Point MC-3: The Claim about the Time of Dick Cheney’s Entry into the White House Bunker  Поставим точку в MC-3: заявление относительно того времени, когда Дик Чейни находился в подземном бункере.The Official Account Официально:Vice President Dick Cheney took charge of the government’s response to the 9/11 attacks after he entered the PEOC (the Presidential Emergency Operations Center), a.k.a. “the bunker”. 9/11 Commission Report said1that Cheney did not enter the PEOC until almost 10:00 AM, which was at least 20 minutes after the violent event at the Pentagon that killed more than 100 people.Вице-президент США Дик Чейни взял на себя управление государством после того,как вошел в правительственный бункер и это произошло по его словам около 10:00 утра, через 20 минут после того, как в Пентагоне погибло более 100 человек.(1)The Best Evidence  Лучшее доказательство:Secretary of Transportation Norman Mineta told the 9/11 Commission that, after he joined Cheney and others in the bunker at approximately 9:20 AM, he listened to an ongoing conversation between Cheney and a young man, which took place when “the airplane was coming into the Pentagon.”2After the young man, having reported for the third time that the plane was coming closer, asked whether “the orders still stand,” Cheney emphatically said they did.However, testimony that Cheney was in the PEOC by 9:20 was reported not only by Mineta but also by Richard Clarke3 and White House photographer David Bohrer.4 Cheney himself, speaking on “Meet the Press” five days after 9/11, reported that he had entered the PEOC before the Pentagon was damaged.5The 9/11 Commission’s attempt to bury the exchange between Cheney and the young man confirms the importance of Mineta’s report of this conversation.Министр транспорта Норман Минета сообщил комиссии 9/11,что он присоединился к Чейни и к остальным в бункере уже в 9:20 и услышал разговор между ним и молодым человеком, когда "самолет направлялся в сторону Пентагона".(2)Когда молодой человек в третий раз запросил Чейни, так как самолет приближается и "все ждут приказа", Чейни решительно ответил, что "он обдумывает".Норман Минета не единственный свидетель, кто подтверждает нахождение Чейни в бункере уже в 9:20. Помимо него об этом говорят Ричард Кларк (3) и фотограф Белого дома Дэвид Борер (4)Сам же Чейни утверждает,что он вошел в бункер после того,как был атакован Пентагон.(5)References for Point MC-31. 9/11 Commission Report (2004), note 213, p. 464.2. “911 Commission: Trans. Sec. Norman Mineta Testimony.”3. Richard Clarke, Against all Enemies (New York: Free Press, 2004), pp. 2-5.4. See “9/11: Interviews by Peter Jennings,” ABC News, September 11, 2002.5. “The Vice President Appears on Meet the Press with Tim Russert,” MSNBC, September 16, 2001.Казалось бы- ну и что? Какое это имеет отношение к экономике? А самое прямое. Напомню,что во время 9/11 были объявлены банковские каникулы, после которых в течении недели рынок потерял более 1 триллиона капитализации:Эти атаки оказали значительное экономическое воздействие на американский и мировой рынки. ФРС временно сократил контакты с банками из-за нарушений коммуникационного оборудования в финансовом районе Нижнего Манхэттена. Обратная связь и контроль над денежной массой, включая мгновенную ликвидность банков, была восстановлена в течение нескольких часов. Нью-Йоркская фондовая биржа (NYSE), Американская фондовая биржа и NASDAQ не открылись 11 сентября и оставались закрытыми до 17 сентября. Объекты NYSE и её центры обработки данных не пострадали, но члены биржи, клиенты и другие биржи потеряли с ней связь из-за разрушений телефонного узла около ВТЦ. Когда 17 сентября биржи открылись, после самого долгого периода бездействия со времён Великой депрессии в 1929 году, Индекс Доу-Джонса («DJIA») потерял 684 пункта, или 7,1 %, до 8920, это было самым большим его падением в течение одного дня. К концу недели DJIA упал на 1369,7 пунктов (14,3 %), это было самым большим недельным падением в истории. Американские акции потеряли 1,2 триллиона долл. в течение недели.Стоит обратить внимание на слова Билла Гросса "The Good Times Are Over, The Time For Risk Taking Has Passed" о том, что :"институциональные инвесторы финансовой экономики такие как, фонды денежного рынка, страховые, пенсионные, банковские и даже потребительские балансы больше не могут обеспечить уровень доходности, необходимых для оправдания своих будущих обязательств  и их стало невозможно достичь. Доход по депозитам слишкам мал,чтобы покрыть обязательства. В связи с чем доход по многим классам активов станет отрицательным. По мере снижения ливидности можно будет наблюдать, как ряды рискованных активов будут пополняться , напоминая всем известную игру с музыкальными стульями. И то, что 2015 год или ближайшие 12 месяцев- это время принятия рисков, можно судить по тому,что активов с положительным денежным потоком становится все меньше".Далее мы с вами наблюдаем любопытные вещи, происходящие в крупнейших финансовых учреждениях США.Зерохедж. Is Citi The Next AIG? Citi  - это новый AIG? Напомню, что в Сити работает Саммерс. Тот самый, который организовал в свое время провалившийся фонд Гарварда в России, планировавшийся для того,чтобы организовать то,что сейчас происходит на Украине. Стоит вспомнить о том,что война довольно затратное, а зачастую убыточное мероприятие. И не исключено,что пополнение баланса деривативами как-то связано с тем,что происходит на Украине- Украина банкрот, но , например, Обама подписал закон о поддержке Укрианы на 400 миллионов, к тому же он(Обама) довольно плотно работал с Саммерсом и только общественность заставила отклонить его кандидатуру на пост председателя ФРС, удовольствовашись кандидатурой Фишера на "вторых ролях", хотя Фишер от этого не испытывает никаких страданий.Мы обнаружили,что Citigroup, ранее пролоббировавшая деривативы за счет FDIC, увеличили деривативы на своем балансе в третьем квартале до $70.2 трлн, опередив в этом даже  JPM!Ну раз завели дело о JPM, то давайте поговорим о нем. Этот мегабанк уже довольно давно испытывает давление от регуляторов в том плане, что у них Джейми Даймон одновременно является и генеральным директором и председателем совета директоров. Но, как нам сообщает Зерохедж, основная опасность исходит от конкурента гиганта- Голдман Сакс, чьи люди как раз и работают в регуляторе. Кого заинтересовало, могут подробнее прочитать в оригинале:Зерохедж Goldman's Modest Proposal: It May Be Time To Break Up JPMorgan  Скромное предложение от Голдмана: может, пришло время разбить JPMorganЕще в 2008 году, после падения фондовых рынков, Голдман избавился от двух своих конкурентов: от Bear и Lehman, когда ФРС отказалась спасать эти банки. Теперь, волне возможно, пришла очередь и для JPM.Голдман: недавно было озвучено ФРС,что капитал JPM необходимо поднять до 11,5%,что на 100%-200% выше, чем у всех остальных, то, может быть имеет смысл говорить о целесообразности разделения акционерного капитала, учитывая,что он сейчас является отрицательным. Распад может создать стоимость ниже на 20% и его можно разделить на:  (1) трастовый банк, инвестиционный банк и бизнес по управлению активами и (2) все остальное (то есть более традиционный банковский бизнес). Разделение банка будет способствовать росту акционерного капитала.Вы мне скажете: а при чем тут Дик Чейни? Прямое отношение, конечно, он уже не имеет, просто надо иметь в виду,что США действуют всегда шаблонно, поэтому, например, не исключен вот какой вариант:прогнозирует Байрон Уин из Blackstone Group LP:По словам Уина, в этом году по настоящему проявят себя киберпреступники, которые становятся более ловкими, чем полиция.«Хакеры захватят частные и корпоративные счета одного крупнейшего банка, а Федеральная резервная система закроет это учреждение на пять дней для проверки его счетов»А хакеры- ,понятно, кто- Федеральное бюро расследований США расследует кражу данных из американского банка JP Morgan Chase. Она произошла в середине августа, сообщило агентство Bloomberg со ссылкой на двух сотрудников, имеющих отношение к следствию. По данным агентства, под подозрение попали российские хакеры. Они украли петабайты закрытой информации настолько умело, что эксперты подозревают — хакеры действуют при поддержке российских властей. ФБР расследует, является ли взлом JP Morgan местью российских властей за санкции США из-за конфликта вокруг Украины.или :Блумберг:"элитные российские хакеры взломали биржу Nasdaq и заложили туда цифровую бомбу".Я , надеюсь, что понятно. В условиях, когда ставки находятся на нуле и практически все активы показывают отрицательное значение, то есть идут убытки по причине невозможности капитал воспроизводить, происходит органический рост - за счет поглощения конкурентов. В США давно поглощены мелкие банки, настала очередь крупного финансового капитала выяснять, кто будет сидеть на стуле. В свою очередь, Россия только вступила в данный этап , когда крупные банки выживают за счет разорения мелких, в чем немало способствует ЦБ РФ. Во всяком случае, мы наблюдаем назревание явно революционной ситуации:"верхи не могут, низы не хотят". Вернее: верхи разбираются, для кого стул лишний, а когда разберутся, то назначат мальчика для битья, коим,скорее всего, будет российская элита,этакий хакерский Бен Ладен. Хотя проблемы финансового капитала США должны решаться несколько иными решениями, но американская элита иначе не может- виноват в их проблемах всегда кто-то другой, вот они и решают их, как могут- за чужой счет. И если это кто-то другой согласен его оплачивать- то тем более.

11 декабря 2013, 21:15

Джейми Даймон благодарит Конгресс

 Глава банка JP Morgan Джейми Даймон благодарит конгресс за принятие бюджета. "Этим утром я собираюсь отправить Полу Райану и Патти Мюррей сообщение по электронной почте со словами "Спасибо вам, спасибо вам, спасибо вам, и пусть Господь благословит вас", – заявил Даймон в среду, обращаясь к республиканским конгрессменам и сенаторам из Демократической партии, которым удалось прийти к бюджетному соглашению. По его мнению, бюджетное соглашение - это "большой прорыв", так как повторной временной приостановки работы правительства не произойдет. Напомним, что Конгресс США, не дожидаясь крайнего срока, принял бюджет и предотвратил еще одну временную приостановку работы американского правительства. После продолжительных дебатов демократы и республиканцы все же достигли договоренности и приняли бюджет на 2014 финансовый год. Соглашение предусматривает сокращение госрасходов в течение двух лет на $63 млрд. Причем большая часть секвестра придется на текущий 2014 финансовый год, который в Америке начинается 1 октября.