Book Review : The Trillion Dollar Meltdown

I just finished Charles Morris's The Trillion Dollar Meltdown which was published in January 2008. Since the book is based on an area of professional interest, I think it deserves a detailed review and not just an update.

Morris' book was one of the first texts on financial crisis to come to the market. In less than 200 pages the book covers a huge breadth of topics. Starting from the precedents and history of the recessions during the Lyndon & Reagan presidencies, it goes on to talk about the previous market crashes caused by portfolio insurance & the failure of Long Term Capital Management. He describes the current crisis starting of course from the usual CDO's and derivatives, predatory lending practices including the NINJNA (No Income, No Job, No Asset) loans, the cascading effects of high leverage at hedge funds and other financial institutions and the roles of  the raters, insurers and government bond market. He reconfirms my view that loose monetary policy at the time of Alan Greenspan was one of the leading causes of the crises. (Read my previous post here). Morris strongly approves Paul Volker's handling of the problem in 80's. But what really impressed me about the book is that it covers to the global distribution of money, trade deficits &surpluses and also reserves in countries like China, Russia & in the middle-east. By including the power of sovereign wealth fund of these countries and the recent academic debate about China's savings rate & currency valuations, the authors covers the issue from both domestic & international angles. Any review of the book must take into account that Morris was forecasting the future & not analyzing events.

But there are some drawbacks of packing too much into so few pages and shipping the first book and at some places it misses depth. But for a bird's eye of how thing went wrong and where, The Trillion Dollar Meltdown is great book. In fact I definitely recommend it for any bookshelf. Coming from the other side of the table, Morris sees huge limitations of free markets in cleaning up the current mess. According to him the only immediate option America had was to deleverage (and hopefully in an orderly fashion or things would turn really bad). With the benefit of hindsight, here is a passage from the book

The recent woes of the dollar are important for our story because they effectively take the Fed off the board. As credit crunch works its way through banks and investment funds over the next year or so, there will be no soothing fountains of new dollars coming out of Washington. The days of a universal put to the Federal Reserve are finally over.

Clearly even the best of people did not anticipate how many dollars the Federal Reserve and the government would be willing to print. Here are author's views about the $800 TARP in an interview in October 2008.

Book Update: Right now am reading 'The World is Flat' and 'Eat, Love Pray'.

Globalization & FDI: The winds of change

I have been interested in the phenomenon of Foreign Direct Investment for a while. Till a few years ago, FDI implied the flow of foreign funds into a developing country. The direction was almost taken to be granted and the thoughts of India investing in Europe or Americas didn't cross my kind. Money flowing into the economy was an important indicator of the country's standing and opinion in foreign markets. An important proxy indicator of the possibilities, untainted by government statements. The last ten years of growth have however bought us to a new ground; winds of FDI now clearly blow in both directions.

There is this interesting editorial in Financial Times that shows how the growth in emerging markets has affected the flow of FDI. The article points out that FDI arising out of BRIC nations, Indonesia and South Africa has risen from a mere $10bn in 2003 to $12bn in 2008. A growth of 1100% percent. I remember a headline from the WSJ marketplace front page section about a Chinese company (Sichuan Tenzhong) bidding for the GM Hummer division. The reporter had used the word 'Unknown' literally in the headline. I searched the first four columns and didn't find the name of the company mentioned anywhere.

Coming back to the FT article, it uses four recent examples from the automobile sector involving mergers and purchases by Chinese and Indian companies. Next important learning most of these FDI transactions are M&A transactions and not Greenfield projects. A comparatively easier route with ready access to talent and technology and also a much faster path to growth giving these companies an immediate foothold. To me it is also an indication of the speed of the changes to come.

For the companies in developed markets this therefore is a time of reckoning. Clearly countries like Indian and China are no longer just places to outsource for cheap manufacturing and talent. They are also potential competitors and partners, presenting a need to engage and keep a tab on. The virtues of the 'next billion customers' in growing populations of China and India has already been extolled enough.
I am reminded of the principle of the state of equilibrium. It might be a useful reminder for those in power both in the developing and emerging economies.

You can access the article written by the Matthew Slaughter, associate dean and professor of management at the Tuck School of Business, Dartmouth here

Book Update: Just finished Dan Brown's The Lost Symbol.

Movie Update: Avatar is in a class of its own. Despite its over the top second half, Three Idiots is thoroughly entertaining. Sherlock Homes is a well shot and acted period drama with an unconvincing Dan Brown style story

Lessons from Jim Rogers' life - a gift to us & US

Take a guess as to which country is being mentioned in the following paragraph.

The country X enjoyed a huge bubble in the _____. When it burst in _____, prices collapsed, sending the economy tumbling. Regrettably, the government and the 'central bank of the country X' kept trying to halt the natural, cleansing effects of this recession by propping up many of the companies in trouble. Just as a forest fire serves to clear out deadwood and underbrush so that the forest can renew itself, recessions help to ensure healthy future growth. In 'the country X' , the business that should have been liquidated became "zombie companies" surviving, albeit barely, on government's artificial support. Everything was Band-Aided with quick fixes. While this delayed a decline, it also postponed the country's recovery. A country can actually spend more money trying to stave of a recession than the recession might cost.

You probably think that I am talking about USA. However this is a passage describing 'the lost decade' of Japan by Jim Rogers. Though Jim mentions in passing that America followed the same route in 1970's, he might as well be presaging what may be coming ahead, considering the way the American debt & fiscal deficit has ballooned. To use a cliche, "History repeats itself." As Jim mentions, a country can spend more money trying to avoid a recession than the recession might itself cost. Sounds even more familiar. After all, only last week the Fed chairman Ben Bernanke pointed out that US needs to control is spending & deficits. Of course he did not talk about the fact the balance sheet of the fed itself has been increasing in size as it has been buying just about anything - mortgage backed securities, corporate debt and the T-Bills issued every few days by the US government.

But, lets come back to Jim Rogers, the guy who made enough money to retire at the age of 37. The book in question, " A Gift to My Children - A Father's Lesson for Life and Investing," is packed with knowledge and wisdom. In his own words,
the book is different from his earlier books in the sense that its about the larger lessons distilled from his experiences. Lessons about thinking for yourself, using common sense, learning history, philosophy and languages and making the world a part of your perspective. Lessons, which we all could use. In less than 100 pages Jim packs lessons that can use at all stages of your life and earlier you learn these lessons, the more you can get from them.

As a aside note, according to Jim, 21st century belongs to China. He does not like India and Russia as investment options. So much so that he has moved to Hongkong & is making sure that his two daughters know Mandarin.

Making the case for being an open economy

While it may seem counter-intuitive at first, the most profitable imports for any economy are the skills and talents that it gets from other countries. USA has raced ahead as imported talent from all over the world innovated to take the country on the road to development. I remember brain-drain to the developed west and ways to stop it used to a common debate topic in school and college in India



Thomas Friedman makes the case for staying away from the protectionist urges in NY times editorial that quotes two Indians.

“All you need to do is grant visas to two million Indians, Chinese and Koreans,” said Shekhar Gupta, editor of The Indian Express newspaper. “We will buy up all the subprime homes. We will work 18 hours a day to pay for them. We will immediately improve your savings rate — no Indian bank today has more than 2 percent nonperforming loans because not paying your mortgage is considered shameful here. And we will start new companies to create our own jobs and jobs for more Americans.”

“If you do this, it will be one of the best things for India and one of the worst for Americans, [because] Indians will be forced to innovate at home,” said Subhash B. Dhar, a member of the executive council that runs Infosys.. , the well-known Indian technology company that sends Indian workers to the U.S. to support a wide range of firms

Link to the Thomas Friedman's article.

The 'threat of protectionism is being recognised across the world with the UK prime minister Gordon Brown advising against it in the Wold Economic Forum at Davos this year & the director general of WTO Pascal Lamay calling for free flow of trade information in this hour of crisis

Link

Unfortunately its difficult not to be populist when your people are hurting and its often difficult to explain how being open to trade, immigration and employment could be the best policy.

Update : Had just finished this post when I saw a new update from marketwatch that the G-7 nations have made a pledge to avoid protectionism amid turmoil. Link

Money for free

Today the 'Bernanke helicopter' seems to have landed into uncharted territories. The chairman of Federal Bank who was expected to lower rates by 50 basis points actually reset it to 'ZERO'. Yes this is bizarre headline.  The fed chairman set the fed target rate from  zero to twenty-five basis points, effectively saying that banks will be able to borrow from fed at no price.  If this is not enough to make banks lend, he announced something more, that it will buy mortgage back securities from banks.  

The only other example in history of such low, or rather no interest rates is Japan. The example has not been successful. Money in USA now comes free. But think of this way, what if this does not work. Even if the cost of money is zero, no body wants it. There are two basic problems here

a) Even with money at no price, the banks don't want to lend it furthur. The balance sheets are so messed up that they need a clear head & some time to clean things up. Even in the case of America the previous cuts by the fed have not translated into lower interest rates for the end buyers. 

b) Then there is the gradual unwillingness to spend, the shaken confidence in the system with a lower number every week. Job cuts & threats of job cuts have taken the fun of holiday season and consumption other-wise.

On top of that all this actually reeks of the policy that actually built the bubble from 2002-2007. Isn't  this how the system built so much leverage in the first place. Years of administration policy providing people with easy money.America accounts for 60% of world's consumption and when the American consumer sneezes, no wonder the world catches a cold.  

But to put this in a perspective of time. Monetary policy moves generally take about two quarters (12 to 15 months is the accepted time frame) generally or more to play out. So the affect of these policy moves will be felt at the earliest only, in third quarter of 2009. But the stock markets have already given a thump up sign. The DJIA & S&P 500 & NASDAQ were all up more than 4%.

Another point here is where will fed get the money. Will it keep printing dollars, till it runs out of green ink, as one analyst said. What happens to the exchange rates then ? As of today the European Central bank & central bank of England have both stayed short of both what the Federal Bank has does done. No wonder the dollar fell against both currrencies.

Movie Update : 

'Gran Torino', (Clint Eastwood packs a so much straight forwardness , american-ness and intensity into this movie that even non-americans like me loved it). Read the new york times review here

Slumdog Millionaire  (A great movie, with amazing potraits of everyday life from India packed into a dramatic story) 

End of Capitalism as we know it ?

Ben Bernake addressing the 'The Economic Club' in New York. His statements indicate a shift of long term US policy as we have known it  

a.  Monetary policy has its limits in addresses crises like these and innovative solutions are needed

b.  We need to create systematic authorities to address large non-bank firms that pose systematic risk

c.   We did not have a mechanism;  no body, no authority, no markets for all those securities

d.   There is a problem that these assets do not trade, there is no liquidity and no independent  price discovery. 

If all this retrospection were to be translated into policy talk, he means that policies which let financial firms have there own models to evaluate assets values & risks need to be re-evaluated. The assets should be traded in exchanges & have market determined values. This part of it, to have  a clearing house and an exchange for these assets, is a much agreed view by now.

 

Statement a evaluates a current situation and, statement c clearly indicates part of the helplessness of the US policy as it was, to prevent this situation and provide a way forward. Probably indication of new separate regulatory bodies for non-banks (unlike a situation earlier where Investment Banking firms had no regulatory authorization)

Now add up c , d & the latest actions of US treasury

1. To take a stake in banks

2. To put conditions like 

           a.  No more golden parachutes .,

            b.  Limits on executive compensation (top 5)

            c.  Limits on risk 

            d.  And, government to have voting rights on matters that affect the investment.  

All this together symbolises a distinct shift in from the free for all market to a more centralised one. The reluctance of the US government, adequately pointed out time & again in various statements underscores the point even more. Total communism as was practised by the erstwhile Soviet Union died long time ago and now is the time of reckoning for complete capitalism and free markets. 

This is the system that they have moved to back home in India,  there are markets and there are regulatory bodies - some government owned and quite a few self regulatory ones like AMFI. We decided to move away from the socialist view of Nehrus after about four decades of being independent, leading to about a decade and half of higher growth but we have still maintained a hold on things. The risk taken are far lower. The banks have a minimum capital ratio of 9% stipulated by RBI unlike the US banks where the minimum is only 4% and a bank is supposed to be well capitalised at above 6%. And none of this applied to Investment Banks, a institution category that no longer exists in the US financial system.  This is also the thought shared by some of those European & Asian economies for who moved from extremes on either side to the centralised point of view. 

The knowledge economy/software boom

This will be an eye opening reading for many. That Indian IT story is big no doubt and we often get carried but this ET article carries the point home. The Indian IT story is still minisicule as compared to the old economy. For a starter, one old economy company and a PSU at that, has higher net profit than our top 5/6 IT companies combined. Today when new age IT companies celebrate their topline touching billion dollars , its bottom line is touching a billion.

This is not a stock recommendation for SAIL but the point is Indian old economy has carried this nation this far and is still going equally strong. Not to deny the Indian service sector its due, it is high time we realize the contribution of old economy sectors and the PSUs.The ET article by the way is here.