CNBC 下午新闻的一些看法

pqu

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29386561

不知道到HT里的各位老大如何解读这条新闻。提一些自己的看法，希望集思广益，个人认为这为未来几个月的一些大动作打下了伏笔

前一段时间议论最多的无非是AIG和C究竟会不会破产。自然说不会的居多，原因也正和媒体中广泛流传的说法类似，"too big to fail"，政府相信一定也很头疼，因为政府介入的目的是为了消除类似于雷曼兄弟倒下带来的市场恐慌（unsecured creditor因为自己的手中的notes/bond突然之间便的一文不值而又无法保证拿到抵押而导致大量抛售套现，从而真正引爆了金融业的炸弹)。但是政府并不一定真的希望去花大笔的钱救助一个企业。换句话说，如果政府可以花更少的钱，在市场一片和谐的气氛下让AIG破产，相信这是政府最希望看到的。想要做到这一点，就一定要有比破产保护外更温和的办法，这也正是这条新闻中极力宣传的要设立类似于FDIC的机构，为企业债务作担保而避免也破产保护引起的大规模债务清算。之所以认为这条新闻有很大的影响，是因为它为未来一个季度，尤其是在ER后可能出现的default提供了一个解决方案。也从侧面进一步证明了经济的基本面还在继续恶化，大型Financial Institution的default rate还会进一步增加。

同时，我认为这或许是媒体宣传导向的一个转折点。也就是我一直深度怀疑的前一段时间集中的大幅为C和其他金融机构造势的目的就是为了在政府监管破产前让private sector的投资人出货套现。包括C的股价被两次强行拉到$3.25之上，大有为前一段时间政府和private sector的优先转普通股出货的嫌疑。如果真的是这样，相信四月份会是利空消息非常集中的一个月，金融机构也有可能进行一次大规模的重新洗牌。

个人观点，短期，取决于大型金融机构的出货情况（尤其关注C在$3.25 (+/-）0.5 范围之内的出货量），可能还有一次（或几次）拉高出货的机会（包括今天，虽然金融股很弱，倒是MM们依然可以拆东墙补西墙没有让SPX跌破780，为未来可能的出货稳住了阵脚)，直到上面文章中提到的4月6日左右。这其后，应该是伴随着某一个重大新闻（按惯例，不是晚上就是周末），进行深度跳水。

Cobra

顶，很有道理的样子。

puiventi

很有见解，顶一下~

Billyboy

Great Point. Thanks

Diver

顶，很有道理！


1# pqu

小胖蜜蜂

pilgrim

support, Gann mentioned the newspapers tell you what the insiders want you to know, not what you need to know.

hnhy

Thanks!

Braveheart

高，实在是高。

blues55

顶， 有道理

coexist

很有道理

面包车

Very good post.

NewMember

wishful thinking.

C might be nationalized, but will never go bankrupt.  AIG can't go bankrupt because that'll cause chain reaction.  There is no parallel between AIG and Lehman brothers.  

What is 大型金融机构's purchase price for C?  How do you know $3 is good for them to get out.

Unless the government lost hope to revive the economy in near term and just gave up, they'd never let C go bankrupt.

JL01

Thanks a lot!

darth

wishful thinking.

C might be nationalized, but will never go bankrupt.  AIG can't go bankrupt because that'll cause chain reaction.  There is no parallel between AIG and Lehman brothers.  

What  ...
NewMember 发表于 2009-3-19 18:33

But nationalization means the same thing to common share holders as bankcruptcy though. So if investors like Saudi Prince who want to get out before the common shares are wiped out, they better do it before that happens.

pqu

13# NewMember


Agree with you that C or AIG will not file Chapter 11 immediately or directly.  However, as what happened to Washington Mutual last year, the best portion of its business was first taken over by FDIC and sell to a buyer.  After all "Good Assets" are protected, then the "bad" one files Chapter 11.  I would read the news as that Fed will setup a facility similar to FDIC to protect "good" C or AIG to avoid unnecessary panic and then let the trash flushing in toilet.

About stock price, it is only my 2 cents.  Not a serious opinion. :-)

NewMember

But nationalization means the same thing to common share holders as bankcruptcy though. So if investors like Saudi Prince who want to get out before the common shares are wiped out, they better do ...
darth 发表于 2009-3-19 18:37

The Saudi Prince might have got conversion price of $3 or so, but he doesn't represent big C's institution shareholders.  Most institution shareholders with millions of shares accumulated those shares in years, their purchase price is for sure way higher than $3, might be even higher than $30.  

There is a fundamental difference between nationalization and bankruptcy, that is, nationalization can be reverted, but bankruptcy can't.  A nationalized C can go private again after things eventually have turned around, like what happened in Sweden.  In that case, current share holders can still hold on to their stocks and wait.  When C goes private again, C's share price can go back to $5, $10, $15, $20 whatsoever.  It might only be too little and too late for those who bought C before this financial crisis, but they will eventually get something back.  However, if C goes bankrupt, the entity will completely disappear and no shareholder will ever get a penny from it.

peachseed

很有意思的解读。

darth

The Saudi Prince might have got conversion price of $3 or so, but he doesn't represent big C's institution shareholders.  Most institution shareholders with millions of shares accumulated those sh ...
NewMember 发表于 2009-3-19 18:52

That's true. But even if it can go back to private again in the future, tax payers will have to be paid back first before common share holders. So it could be 10, 20 years or even more (depending on the speed of economic recovery) for common share holders to get any money back.

NewMember

13# NewMember


Agree with you that C or AIG will not file Chapter 11 immediately or directly.  However, as what happened to Washington Mutual last year, the best portion of its business was firs ...
pqu 发表于 2009-3-19 18:43

FDIC collects fees from banks as premium, it runs like a state-own insurance company for banks.  If a bank gets in trouble, FDIC goes in and takes over.  It gives back people's deposit and sell the bank's assets.  If the amount FDIC gets from assets sale is less than its obligation, that's where the premium comes to play.  

FDIC recently raised the fees it requires for the banks.  What this tells us?  After having closed between 100 - 200 banks, its reservoir is running low and it may run out of money one day.  

I think what FDIC did for Washington Mutual is basically the same as what it did for those smaller bankrupted banks.  The difference is, for smaller banks, FDIC takes over first and then looks for a buyer for the bank's assets.  In Washington Mutual's case, it found a buyer and got the deal for the sale first.

In the current situation, it's hard to imagine FDIC can broker a sale for Citi, as it did for Washington Mutual.  It can't just take over Citi and auction off its assets either, because even if FDIC may have enough fund to pay off Citi's depositor, how about Citi's other business?