QUOTE OF THE DAY

3 comments

Posted on 19th April 2013 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

“I believe we have a crisis of values that is extremely deep, because the regulations and the legal structured need reform. But I meet a lot of these people on Wall Street on a regular basis right now. I’m going to put it very bluntly. I regard the moral environment as pathological. And I’m talking about the human interactions that I have. I’ve not seen anything like this, not felt it so palpably.

These people are out to make billions of dollars and nothing should stop them from that. They have no responsibility to pay taxes, they have no responsibility to their clients, they have no responsibility to people… counterparties in transactions. They are tough, greedy, aggressive, and feel absolutely out of control, in a quite literal sense. And they have gamed the system to a remarkable extent and they have a docile president, a docile White House and a docile regulatory system that absolutely can’t find its voice. It’s terrified of these companies.

If you look at the campaign contributions, which I happened to do yesterday for another purpose, the financial markets are the number one campaign contributors in the U.S. system now. We have a corrupt politics to the core, I’m afraid to say… both parties are up to their necks in this.

… But what it’s led to is this sense of impunity that is really stunning and you feel it on the individual level right now. And it’s very very unhealthy, I have waited for four years… five years now to see one figure on Wall Street speak in a moral language. And I’ve have not seen it once. And that is shocking to me. And if they won’t, I’ve waited for a judge, for our president, for somebody, and it hasn’t happened. And by the way it’s not gonna happen any time soon, it seems.

Janet Tavakoli

MR. & MRS. EVIL

3 comments

Posted on 13th May 2012 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

,

Janet Tavakoli is one sharp truth telling analyst. There aren’t many out there, so you should listen when they speak. Jamie Dimon and Blythe Masters should be fired. They continue to take risks that could create another worldwide contagion. They represent everything that is revolting about our warped financial system built upon greed, corruption and extreme risk taking – knowing that Ben will come to their rescue when they screw up. Who pays the price? You and me.

Janet Tavakoli

President, Tavakoli Structured Finance

 Jamie Dimon’s SNAFU: JPMorgan’s Other Derivatives’ Losses

In an August 2010 commentary about JPMorgan’s losses in coal trades I wrote: “The commodities division isn’t the only area in which JPMorgan is vulnerable.  Credit derivatives, interest rate derivatives, and currency trading are vulnerable to leveraged hidden bets.  Ambitious managers strive to pump speculative earnings from zero to hero.”

At issue is corporate governance at JPMorgan and the ability of its CEO, Jamie Dimon, to manage its risk.  It’s reasonable to ask whether any CEO can manage the risks of a bank this size, but the questions surrounding Jamie Dimon’s management are more targeted than that.  The problem Jamie Dimon has is that JPMorgan lost control in multiple areas.  Each time a new problem becomes public, it is revealed that management controls weren’t adequate in the first place.

JPMorgan’s Derivatives Blow Up Again

Jamie Dimon’s problem as Chairman and CEO — his dual role raises further questions about JPMorgan’s corporate governance — is that just two years ago derivatives trades were out of control in his commodities division. JPMorgan’s short coal position was over sized relative to the global coal market.  JPMorgan put this position on while the U.S. is at war.  It was not a customer trade; the purpose was to make money for JPMorgan.  Although coal isn’t a strategic commodity, one should question why the bank was so reckless.

After trading hours on Thursday of this week,  Jamie Dimon held a conference call about $2 billion in mark-to-market losses in credit derivatives (so far) generated by the Chief Investment Office, the bank’s “investment” book.  He admitted:

“In hindsight, the new strategy was flawed, complex, poorly reviewed, poorly executed and poorly monitored.”

But lets get back to commodities.  For several years, legendary investor Jim Rogers has expressed his concern to me about JPMorgan’s balance sheet, credit card division and his belief that Blythe Masters, the head of JPMorgan’s commodities area, knows so little about commodities.  Jim Rogers is an expert in commodities and is the creator or the Rogers International Commodities Index.  He also sells out-of-the-money calls on JPMorgan stock.  So far, that strategy has worked out well for him.  (Rogers gave me permission to publicly reflect his views and his trades.)  Moreover, JPMorgan is still grappling with potential legal liabilities related to the mortgage crisis.

Is Jim Rogers justified in his harsh view of JPMorgan’s commodities division?  After he expressed his concerns, JPMorgan’s coal trade made the news, and it appeared to me that Jim Rogers is on to something.  For those of you who missed it the first time, my August 9, 2010 commentary is reproduced below in its entirety.  Dawn Kopecki at Bloomberg/BusinessWeek broke the story wherein Blythe Masters’ quotes first appeared:

JPMorgan’s Losses from Indecent Overexposure – August 9, 2010

JPMorgan Chase’s fixed-income revenue fell almost 28 percent to $3.6 billion in the second quarter, down from $5.5 billion in the first quarter, and down from $4.9 billion for the same period last year.  JPMorgan blamed an interest rate squeeze and bad results in the credit markets and the commodities markets.
There were no details of its significant loss from unwise, gigantic, wrong-way wartime coal bets.  The bank took a short position so enormous that it was oversized relative to the global coal market, and second quarter losses reportedly were in the hundreds of millions of dollars.
Financial Reform Failure
Blythe Masters, managing director in charge of JPMorgan’s global commodities group, spent time lobbying in Washington to dilute financial reform.  By her own admission, JPMorgan’s recent speculation in coal wasn’t client driven; the risk was taken on JPMorgan’s behalf.  The Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Bill does nothing to prevent a repeat — or even a potentially worse — debacle.
The commodities division isn’t the only area in which JPMorgan is vulnerable.  Credit derivatives, interest rate derivatives and currency trading are vulnerable to leveraged hidden bets.  Ambitious managers strive to pump speculative earnings from zero to hero.
Instead of transparent and regulated markets, we have dark markets, hidden leverage, proprietary speculative trading, lax regulation and oversized risks.
“Scared Sh*tless” 1
Blythe Masters told her remaining employees that competitors are “scared sh*tless” of JPMorgan’s commodities division.  She claimed the layoffs of 10 percent of front office staff are not a sign of JPMorgan “panicking” and called the risk taking in coal trading that left JPMorgan wide-open to a massive short squeeze a “rookie error.”
For individual traders, JPMorgan doesn’t follow the Wall Street maxim: He who sells what isn’t his’n, must buy it back or go to pris’n.  The United States can count on JPMorgan to continue both long and short market manipulation and take its winnings and losses from blind gambles.  Shareholders, taxpayers and consumers will foot the bill for any unpleasant global consequences.
Physical oil traders from JPMorgan’s brand new RBS Sempra Commodities LLP acquisition (JPMorgan paid $1.7 billion) left of their own accord to join smaller firms with less capital.   Masters said these were “very interesting career decisions.”
The defections were all the more interesting, because Masters began her career as a JPMorgan commodities trader.  RBS Sempra’s oil traders gave Masters a vote of no confidence.  Their flight was a loss of “key people,” whom she said she needs to replace. Masters is poised for more debacles:

“All it’s going to take is a little pop to the upside. We could be producing a 30 to 35 percent ROE and looking like gods.”

Good luck with that.  Masters also noted that this potential windfall might come at the expense of others:

“We’ve got too many banks chasing too little volume and margins have compressed.”

The United States is trying to pull out of the greatest financial tailspins in its history.  Dice-rolling braggadacio by a key officer at one of the nation’s largest banks is exactly the kind of thing Congress, taxpayers and voters should find scary.  Arianna Huffington explains the consequences for middle class Americans, who pay a disproportionate share of the bill in her upcoming book, Third World America. 2
Ramp up Risk and Cross Your Fingers
Big unanticipated market moves always result in big winners and big losers among big gamblers. After the fact, most winners claim they were smart — not just lucky.
When bank managers take a big gamble and lose hundreds of millions of dollars, they don’t call it reckless; they spin it as an error of “judgment.”  The directive is to “put on risk” and “generate results.”  This may be why Masters cautioned employees:

“I don’t want us talking to the outside world, neither about successes nor about failures.”

JPMorgan is making big bets and crossing its fingers in a dangerous and volatile market. Masters takes “pleasure” in the “ballsiest” business, and she wants her traders to get lucky.  Moreover, she’s engaged in internal spin control and plans a “deep dive” with the Board and the CFO.  This may reduce her chances of walking Wall Street.
No one should be concerned for the job security of managers like Masters at JPMorgan, and that is precisely the problem.  Delusional risk-taking and lack of transparency at Too-Big-To-Fail banks — especially in the areas most vulnerable to rampant speculation — were ignored by so-called financial reform.

 

1 All words in this article in quotation marks are from Business Week’s (Bloomberg News) major scoop after the leak of a tape of an internal JPMorgan July 22 conference call: “Blythe Masters Says ‘Don’t Panic’ as Commodities Slip,” by Dawn Kopecki, August 3, 2010.

2 Based on my reading of an advance copy of Arianna Huffington’s new book: Third World America: How Our Politicians Are Abandoning the Middle Class and Betraying the American Dream, Crown Books, September 2010.

Endnote: Jane Wollman Rusoff interviewed me for Research Magazine‘s May 2012 cover story, “Finding the Culprits of the Crisis,” about the deep monetary connections of Wall Street and Washington and the corrosive effect it has had on the economy and the Republic.

JANET TAVAKOLI FOR PRESIDENT

9 comments

Posted on 25th April 2012 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

This lady is a truth teller. We need more people like her to speak out about the crimes being committed by Wall Street bankers and their crony accomplices in Washington DC.

Finding the Culprits
Derivatives expert Janet Tavakoli takes a hard look at what — and who — caused the financial crisis.
By

April 25, 2012

…Now Tavakoli sees another huge financial crisis looming.

The University of Chicago MBA has traded, structured and sold derivatives at firms including Merrill Lynch, PaineWebber and Westdeutsche Landesbank; and she had earlier stints at Bear Stearns and Goldman Sachs. Research recently talked with her about red flags and preventive solutions.

You write that, in the past three years nothing has been fixed but that we must hold Wall Street responsible for the fraud that resulted in the financial crisis. What should be done?

We need to have investigations. But with the pushback and all the lobbying, what they’ve been counting on is that the statute of limitations for some of these frauds is expiring. So if you don’t file complaints, you may not be able to.

Members of Congress are enabling the lack of punishment and covering up great misdeeds in our financial system — and they’re doing it with no fear of consequences — i.e., being voted out of office, in which case they could find themselves the subject of investigation.

What do you mean: “covering up”?

Many people are covering up for cronies who have a lot of money sloshing around. We threw money into the financial system with no accountability and thus made the problem worse. Our system has been completely infiltrated and bought off. Things aren’t changing because Big Money doesn’t want it to change.

What other indications are there of a cover-up?

The MF Global dog-and-pony show. The attitude toward bundlers like Jon Corzine [the firm’s ex-CEO], who is a big bundler for the Obama campaign, is that the guy can do no wrong. This was before he even testified. People who are raising big money for campaigns get off with no real investigation.

In the Sarbanes-Oxley age, for MF Global to say they were unaware of what they were doing beggars belief. And yet there has been no indictment.

Is President Obama part of the cover-up?

Yes, in that he’s enabled it. He’s left people in place who crashed the global financial system in the first place: [Treasury Secretary] Tim Geithner and [Federal Reserve chair] Ben Bernanke. Obama had told us: “You can’t keep doing things the same way and expect different results.” So he’s been quite a hypocrite.

Who else is in the cover-up?

Mary Schapiro was appointed [by President Obama] to head the SEC. She was formerly head of FINRA, the antichrist of investor advocacy! Yet she was chosen SEC [chair] because the regulators are captive by and serve the people they’re supposed to be regulating. They do not serve investors.

In a way, Obama has been the anti-regulator because he didn’t put people in the regulatory agencies, the Fed or the Treasury who would investigate and fix things that are wrong in our global financial system.

If he’s re-elected, then presumably, things will continue in this same way?

Yes.

What if a Republican is elected President?

Who else is not in the pocket of Big Money interests!  (Ron Paul – Jesse)

So, no matter who’s President, these crimes — if you want to call them crimes — will be perpetuated?

Yes. And we do want to call them crimes! They are crimes.

What should Obama do now to help Americans?

He has a lot of resources at his disposal, one main one being moral suasion — he’s got the pulpit. When there was a crisis, Reagan, Carter, Bush went on television and explained what needed to be done. We haven’t seen that kind of leadership from President Obama. If anything, the American people have been told things to make them think [conditions] aren’t really as bad as they are: inflation isn’t as bad as you think because an iPad is cheaper now — nonsense like that.

So the public is being poorly informed?

Yes. Therefore, financial advisors need to be doing fundamental analysis of investments and not [only] be reading the Wall Street Journal or, God forbid, watching CNBC.  (Don’t look for any appearances on CNBC or Bloomberg TV, Janet – Jesse)

In other words, FAs should do their own research and figure things out for themselves.

Yes. Sadly, you’re on your own. That’s part of how we got into this mess: We lost the art of rolling up our sleeves and looking for opportunities.

On Internet TV, you stated that we’re “absolutely vulnerable to a repeat [crisis] because the fraud went unpunished and we printed money like crazy to bail us out of the last one.” That’s scary.

But the fact is we’ve bailed people out and had no consequences for them. So it emboldened them to turn around and behave in the same way. Look at banks like JP Morgan: Shortly after the crisis, they thumbed their nose at the idea of trying to separate speculation from the rest of the bank. So if you don’t have restraints on behavior, you’ll see it repeated. And now we’ve made it worse. It’s like handing a drunk driver who got into a crash the keys to a bigger, faster car together with a bottle of vodka.

In every area of finance where we bailed people out, you see the same wrongdoers volunteering to help fix the situation. That’s pretty funny: They weren’t trustworthy before, and they’re not trustworthy now.

But what about the investigations that already have been held?

They’re all for show, and people end up with a slap on the wrist for minor issues. Investigators should be looking instead at the interconnected fraud that infected the mortgage lending market. And there is still a lot today, especially fraud on borrowers. If you go to the root of the problem and choke off the money supply, you stop the fraud in its tracks.

But the banks say they lost money.

The fact that a bank lost money isn’t an indication that they were a victim as opposed to being a perpetrator. A classic problem with control fraud is that the parasites destroy the host — in this case, the host being the bank and the parasites being the bank employees. If you were the victim of a control fraud by the people who worked in your own bank but meanwhile, you were collecting huge bonuses, you overlooked the control fraud within your own institution.

Why haven’t the apparently guilty been punished?

We haven’t seen the felony indictments that these people richly deserve because our regulators and investigators are captive — and Congress, more than ever, has been lobbied, courted and bought off by Wall Street. More than any time in the past, you’ve seen these big-money interests protected by Congress.

Is there an alternative to bailouts, such as those of the financial crisis?

Yes. Troubled financial entities should be restructured, old shareholders should be wiped out and we should return Glass-Steagall.

What should have been done in the case of, say, AIG?

Bankruptcy declared, and then [the government] says: “We’ll back-stop your contracts for now, but we’re going to investigate all those fraudulent credit derivative contracts and ‘claw’ money ‘back’ from your counterparties — like Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse — if need be.” So there’s a controlled demolition. You’re not just handing money out with no consequences….

Read the rest here.

ROBBER BARONS

11 comments

Posted on 19th February 2012 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, ,

Janet Tavakoli is one of the truth tellers. If you have a Kindle, you can get her new book for free.



19 February 2012

Free Kindle Edition of The New Robber Barons By Janet Tavakoli

 
For today and tomorrow the $9.99 Kindle edition of The New Robber Barons by Janet Tavoli is free.You must own a kindle to download it. You can find it here.

DID HANK PAULSON TELL YOU HE WAS NATIONALIZING FANNIE & FREDDIE?

2 comments

Posted on 4th December 2011 by Administrator in Economy |Politics |Social Issues

, , , , , ,

How can Hank Paulson not be in a jail cell? How can Americans not be outraged and calling for his head on a pike? Hank and his Goldman Sachs pals continue to loot and pillage. His buddy Corzine steals billions and sits in his palatial estate. Paulson writes a book patting himself on the back for saving the world. He destroyed the world and saved bankers. The vast swath of America is comfortably numb, uninterested and incapable of critical thought. Just the way the bankers like it. 

Is Crony Capitalism Wrong?

By: Janet Tavakoli

On Nov. 29, 2011, Bloomberg magazine’s Richard Teitelbaum published an article revealing a secret meeting on July 21, 2008, with then secretary of the treasury and former Goldman Sachs CEO Hank Paulson, and around a dozen hedge-fund managers and Wall Street executives.

Five of the hedge fund managers were former Goldman Sachs employees. The meeting was held at the offices of the founder of hedge fund Eton Park Capital Management, Eric Mindich, a former 15-year employee of Goldman Sachs who rose to be the senior strategy officer of Goldman’s executive office. He is also current chair of the asset managers’ committee of the President’s Working Group on Capital Markets.

Then Secretary Paulson asked the hedge fund managers what the market might think if he placed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into conservatorship, a move that would have wiped out value for the shareholders and possibly wiped out value for subordinated debt holders.

According to the article, one hedge fund manager had a short position in these stocks when he walked into the meeting. He was shocked that Secretary Paulson blabbed specifics, and the hedge fund managers therefore believed the Treasury Department would implement the plan. Seven weeks later, it did.

The hedge fund manager called his lawyer at a break in the meeting, and his lawyer told him Paulson had divulged non-public material information. His lawyer advised him to stop trading in the shares of these companies immediately. Ironically, that meant the hedge fund manager could not cover his short positions, so he profited by riding the value of the shares all the way down to the bottom. If he hadn’t been at the meeting, and if he had any doubts, he might have covered his short position earlier and made less money. One will never know, because Secretary Paulson tied the hedge fund manager’s hands.

But the more interesting implication is for the other managers in attendance. If they didn’t already have a short position in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, they now had non-public material information that would allow them to almost certainly profit mightily by initiating such a trade. They could even be more confident in shorting other financial institutions that would likely take a shellacking.

Richard Teitelbaum quoted me: “What is this but crony capitalism? Most people have had their fill of it.”

Meanwhile, then Secretary Paulson told the public a different story than he told the meeting attendees. According to Bloomberg’s research, earlier that day, Paulson told the New York Times that the Federal Reserve and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency were inspecting Fannie and Freddie’s books and he expected the result of this would inspire confidence. The Times’s article appeared the following day. Any investor in the shares of Fannie and Freddie would be less likely to sell their shares in the face of this reassuring message.

There is no way of knowing whether the hedge fund managers initiated new trades as a result of this meeting, but the key issue is that then Secretary of the Treasury Paulson communicated non-public material information that could financially benefit the recipients at the public’s expense.

Apparent Damage Control: That’s How They Roll

On Wednesday, Nov. 30, 2011, I got a call from a staffer for Congressman Michael Quigley (D., IL.). Congressman Quigley represents Illinois’s 5th district. He replaced Rahm Emanuel, the current mayor of Chicago, in a special election after Rahm resigned to become White House Chief of Staff. Rod Blagojevich preceded Rahm Emanuel. Blagojevich was elected governor in 2002 and was subsequently impeached for corruption and misconduct and convicted of one count of lying to the FBI. He awaits sentencing.

Congressman Quigley’s staffer called because he saw my quote in the Bloomberg article. He claimed he was looking for clarification of my position, and I stated the article accurately reflected my viewpoint. But the staffer seemed to me to defend the meeting.

The staffer said this kind of meeting “happens all the time.” I retorted, “Really? What’s the excuse?”

He then claimed he was just trying to play “devil’s advocate.” But don’t we have a surplus of those?

The staffer claimed that people want to discuss regulations with people who might be affected. I responded that this excuse is ludicrous. Then Secretary of the Treasury Paulson discussed material non-public information about the restructuring of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with people who were in a position to profit at the expense of the public. I cut the phone call short at that point.

I would like to give my local politician the benefit of the doubt that a staffer wasn’t acting as an errand boy trying to send a message, but that phone call didn’t give me much to work with. It seems that whether it’s Henry Paulson working for a Republican administration or a Democratic errand boy doing apparent damage control, it looks as if we’re steeped in bi-partisan sleaze. If the staffer was merely playing the fool, then U.S. citizens needn’t suffer them gladly.

Breach of Then Treasury Secretary Paulson’s Duty as a Public Steward

This is from the Department of Treasury’s website: “Treasury’s mission highlights its role as the steward of U.S. economic and financial systems, and as an influential participant in the world economy.”

It seems to me that the secretary of the treasury is a civil servant and a public steward. When then Secretary Paulson offered material non-public information to hedge fund managers that could profit by trading shares (initiating new shorts) of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac while telling the public a different story, he breached those duties.

Public service is just a social contract, and as one fund manager observed, “So are the Ten Commandments.”

What do we, as Americans, stand for and how much of this can we stand? What are we willing to tolerate or not tolerate from our public servants? Where did we go so wrong that congressional staffers — most probably errand boys — imply that crony capitalism is business as usual?

In case our politicians or their staffers may have any remaining questions, let me be clear.

The above meeting is an example of crony capitalism, and it is wrong.