UK banks – the story so far
Richard Hunter, head of UK equities, Hargreaves Lansdown
August 04 2008
With more than half of the UK banks' half-year reporting season now completed, the overall numbers have not made for good reading.
Admittedly, much of the bad news (which has subsequently been borne out) had been largely factored into share prices which have, on the whole, taken a mauling over the last year. Nonetheless, with eyes particularly focused on the likes of Barclays and RBS, it would appear that this season could prove to be one to forget.
Banking woes
The reports were kicked off when Lloyds TSB reported a 70% dip in half-year profits and as such these numbers represented a cautious opening, with profits largely pegged back by a hit in investment writedowns.
Whilst the group's exposure to the US subprime fallout is negligible compared to some of its peers, it nonetheless remains exposed to the UK consumer and the level of defaults is expected to increase, albeit on a manageable basis. It appears that Lloyds did not totally discount an overseas acquisition to achieve greater diversification, even though the reported German approach recently came to nothing.
Lloyds has not, of course, been totally immune to the wider credit crisis and the shares have dipped some 40% over the last year. Nonetheless, concerns regarding the sustainability of the dividend have been firmly quashed, with the clear attractions of a near 12% dividend yield remaining intact. On balance, the general market view towards the shares remains neutral for the time being.
HBOS followed, and rather strangely the current trend in global banking stocks diametrically to oppose the news continued again with the company posting a 51% decline in profits whilst seeing an 8% spike in its share price in early trade.
Stocks rise as profits fall
There was a Merrill Lynch type reaction to the numbers, in that there were no nasty surprises and therefore another contribution to the beginning of the end of the credit crunch may have been made. The actual profit figures were slightly ahead of expectations and the recent rights issue will help shore up the capital ratio to one of the healthiest in Europe, according to the bank's management.
Concerns still linger in the form of the group's exposure to the UK environment and, in particular, the buy-to-let market in which Halifax is a major player. Further disposals of assets have not been ruled out if the price is right, and if the economic landscape deteriorates sufficiently. Despite a 71% drop in the share price over the last year, the existence of better value in the sector leaves the shares as a weak hold in market consensus terms.
The next large bank to report was HSBC, whose results were something of a mixed bag. Some further hefty writedowns continued to negate the progress being made in certain parts of HSBC's global portfolio.
Whilst there were resilient performances in Asia in particular, even growth here is likely to lose a little momentum in the nearer term. This very diversification has been one of the reasons for the bank's relatively strong share price performance, with the shares having posted an 8% gain in the last six months during a period when the vast majority of HSBC's peers have been suffering.
The yield remains supportive at around 5.5% and the rumoured renegotiation on the Korean Exchange Bank stake is further proof of the bank's growth ambitions. Nonetheless, the US situation is proving to be an ongoing drag on profits and, with an economic slowdown in train in many of the developed economies, HSBC has not proved to be the bank to lift some of the gloom on this UK interim reporting season. The market view of the shares remains no more than a hold.
For Barclays and RBS - the latter of which is largely expected actually to post a loss for the period - there will be a late chance to turn sentiment around with some robust numbers. However, if the performance of their peers is anything to go by, this may be asking just a little too much yet.
05 August 2008
04 August 2008
House Prices ~ How low can they Go?
Think of a number........say 10%
Think again..............say double it to 20%
Think again and compare it to the latest projection of say HBOS .........say 30%
That's probably not far out over the next 2 years!
Think again..............say double it to 20%
Think again and compare it to the latest projection of say HBOS .........say 30%
That's probably not far out over the next 2 years!
Job cuts Looming in USA........
Looming job cuts march on - report
The number of job cuts announced in July jumps 26%. Airlines and financial firms top the list, according to a monthly study.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The nation's employers continue to put jobs on the chopping block at a steep rate as the economy struggles, according to a new report.
Challenger, Gray & Christmas, an outplacement consultancy firm, said Monday that planned job cuts announced by employers in July jumped 26% to 103,312 from 81,755 announced in June. That's up 141% from a year ago, when employers announced planned job cuts totaling 42,897.
The July figure marks the second-highest number of planned job cuts this year, rivaling the May reading that showed 103,522.
"We have seen job cuts increase in the majority of industries that we track," John Challenger, chief executive of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, said in a statement.
Monday's report indicates that the downturn in the housing and financial sectors, "has spread throughout much of the economy," Challenger said.
Indeed, the report showed job cuts in the works increasing from a year ago in 17 of the 25 industries tracked by Challenger.
Employers in the transportation industry announced the largest number job cuts on the horizon, at 17,051 for the month.
Planned job cuts in the transportation sector were dominated by airlines, which have struggled with soaring fuel costs and declining ticket sales due to softening consumer confidence, according to Challenger.
Transportation was followed by the financial services sector, where employers announced 15,517 job cuts on the block.
Financial firms remained led the year, having already announced 100,775 planned layoffs through July, the report showed.
Employers in the retail and automotive industries also ranked high on the list.
The Challenger report follows a Labor Department report Friday that showed the nation's unemployment rate climbing to a four-year high of 5.7%. It was the worst reading since March 2004, and slightly worse than economists' forecast of 5.6%.
But there was a bright spot in the government's report. The economy lost 51,000 jobs lost in July, which was much lower than the 75,000 loss that economists had expected.
First Published: August 4, 2008: 7:30 AM EDT
Unemployment at 4-year highHow bad is the economy? You weigh in
The number of job cuts announced in July jumps 26%. Airlines and financial firms top the list, according to a monthly study.
NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The nation's employers continue to put jobs on the chopping block at a steep rate as the economy struggles, according to a new report.
Challenger, Gray & Christmas, an outplacement consultancy firm, said Monday that planned job cuts announced by employers in July jumped 26% to 103,312 from 81,755 announced in June. That's up 141% from a year ago, when employers announced planned job cuts totaling 42,897.
The July figure marks the second-highest number of planned job cuts this year, rivaling the May reading that showed 103,522.
"We have seen job cuts increase in the majority of industries that we track," John Challenger, chief executive of Challenger, Gray & Christmas, said in a statement.
Monday's report indicates that the downturn in the housing and financial sectors, "has spread throughout much of the economy," Challenger said.
Indeed, the report showed job cuts in the works increasing from a year ago in 17 of the 25 industries tracked by Challenger.
Employers in the transportation industry announced the largest number job cuts on the horizon, at 17,051 for the month.
Planned job cuts in the transportation sector were dominated by airlines, which have struggled with soaring fuel costs and declining ticket sales due to softening consumer confidence, according to Challenger.
Transportation was followed by the financial services sector, where employers announced 15,517 job cuts on the block.
Financial firms remained led the year, having already announced 100,775 planned layoffs through July, the report showed.
Employers in the retail and automotive industries also ranked high on the list.
The Challenger report follows a Labor Department report Friday that showed the nation's unemployment rate climbing to a four-year high of 5.7%. It was the worst reading since March 2004, and slightly worse than economists' forecast of 5.6%.
But there was a bright spot in the government's report. The economy lost 51,000 jobs lost in July, which was much lower than the 75,000 loss that economists had expected.
First Published: August 4, 2008: 7:30 AM EDT
Unemployment at 4-year highHow bad is the economy? You weigh in
Gordon Porridge
What a bunch of celebrated colleagues the Labour party is these days ~ full of comrades & brothers & sisters of course.
So, when Gordon Porridge is on holiday his friends strike. First Miliband with an undisguised but cowardly attack and then a venemous leaked letter from Tony.
Ah ~ not much love and respect from that lot.
I would suggest you duck Gordon ~ it may not be the Ides of March but it may well be a Summer monsoon!
Knife crime ~ stabbed in the back by one of your own.
George Bush and the Judge.
Judge: White House aides can be subpoenaed
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
August 1, 2008
WASHINGTON - A federal judge rejected President George W. Bush's contention that senior White House advisers are immune to subpoenas, siding with Congress' power to investigate the executive branch and handing a victory to Democrats probing the dismissal of nine federal prosecutors.The unprecedented ruling yesterday undercut three presidential confidants who have defied congressional subpoenas for information that Bush says is protected by executive privilege. Democrats swiftly announced they would schedule hearings next month, at the height of election season.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the House could soon vote on a contempt citation against one of the three, Karl Rove, formerly Bush's top adviser."It certainly strengthens our hand," she said of the ruling.
The administration must cooperate fully with Congress and that former administration officials Harriet Miers and Karl Rove must testify before Congress."That wasn't clear at all to the White House or Rove's attorney.Bush administration lawyers were reviewing the ruling and were widely expected to appeal. They also could seek a stay that would suspend any further congressional proceedings."We disagree with the district court's decision," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.With only a few months left in Bush's presidency, there appeared to be no sense of urgency to make the next move."I have not yet talked with anyone at the White House ... and don't expect that this matter will be finally resolved in the very near future," Rove attorney Robert Luskin said in an e-mail.The case marked the first time Congress has gone to court to demand the testimony of White House aides.In his ruling, U.S. District Judge John Bates said there's no legal basis for Bush's argument and that his former legal counsel, Miers, must appear before Congress. If she wants to refuse to testify, he said, she must do so in person. The committee also has sought to force White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten to release documents on any role the White House may have played in the prosecutor firings.Bates, who was appointed to the bench by Bush, issued a 93-page opinion that strongly rejected the administration's legal arguments. He said the executive branch could not point to a single case in which courts held that White House aides were immune from congressional subpoenas.The ruling is a blow to the Bush administration's efforts to bolster the power of the executive branch at the expense of the legislative branch. Disputes over congressional subpoenas are normally resolved through political compromise, not through the court system. Had Bush prevailed, it would have dramatically weakened congressional authority in oversight investigations.Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, signaled that hearings would commence in September on the controversy that scandalized the Justice Department and led to the resignation of a longtime presidential confidant, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
August 1, 2008
WASHINGTON - A federal judge rejected President George W. Bush's contention that senior White House advisers are immune to subpoenas, siding with Congress' power to investigate the executive branch and handing a victory to Democrats probing the dismissal of nine federal prosecutors.The unprecedented ruling yesterday undercut three presidential confidants who have defied congressional subpoenas for information that Bush says is protected by executive privilege. Democrats swiftly announced they would schedule hearings next month, at the height of election season.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the House could soon vote on a contempt citation against one of the three, Karl Rove, formerly Bush's top adviser."It certainly strengthens our hand," she said of the ruling.
The administration must cooperate fully with Congress and that former administration officials Harriet Miers and Karl Rove must testify before Congress."That wasn't clear at all to the White House or Rove's attorney.Bush administration lawyers were reviewing the ruling and were widely expected to appeal. They also could seek a stay that would suspend any further congressional proceedings."We disagree with the district court's decision," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said.With only a few months left in Bush's presidency, there appeared to be no sense of urgency to make the next move."I have not yet talked with anyone at the White House ... and don't expect that this matter will be finally resolved in the very near future," Rove attorney Robert Luskin said in an e-mail.The case marked the first time Congress has gone to court to demand the testimony of White House aides.In his ruling, U.S. District Judge John Bates said there's no legal basis for Bush's argument and that his former legal counsel, Miers, must appear before Congress. If she wants to refuse to testify, he said, she must do so in person. The committee also has sought to force White House Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten to release documents on any role the White House may have played in the prosecutor firings.Bates, who was appointed to the bench by Bush, issued a 93-page opinion that strongly rejected the administration's legal arguments. He said the executive branch could not point to a single case in which courts held that White House aides were immune from congressional subpoenas.The ruling is a blow to the Bush administration's efforts to bolster the power of the executive branch at the expense of the legislative branch. Disputes over congressional subpoenas are normally resolved through political compromise, not through the court system. Had Bush prevailed, it would have dramatically weakened congressional authority in oversight investigations.Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, signaled that hearings would commence in September on the controversy that scandalized the Justice Department and led to the resignation of a longtime presidential confidant, Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Can Caesar survive a Brutus?
Can Brown survive his very British Brutus?
From Monday's Globe and Mail
E-mail Doug Saunders Read Bio Latest Columns
August 4, 2008 at 3:56 AM EDT
LONDON — It is a very British coup that has broken out on the beaches of Europe as Prime Minister Gordon Brown's cabinet members begin their summer vacations with talk of insurrection.
Very British in its thrust, which has been both nasty and secretive: Mr. Brown is guilty of "hubris and vacuity," his leadership "a lamentable confusion of tactics and strategy," said a letter, apparently from former prime minister Tony Blair, that was leaked to the London tabloids this weekend in an apparent bid by Mr. Brown's cabinet challengers to undermine him.
And very British in its subtlety: It began with a newspaper article, written by one of Mr. Brown's closest colleagues, that seemed innocuous and even laudatory in its language, but whose coded messages were quicky interpreted by the entire country to be regicidal.
At its centre is a most unlikely Brutus, a 43-year-old child of Eastern European Jewish refugees whose freshman demeanour and intellectual, wonkish bearing seem out of place both in the aristocratic circles of Westminster and in the calloused world of Labour politics.
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, is both the youngest member of Mr. Brown's cabinet and, until a few days ago, considered among its most loyal. While this widely admired politician had frequently been listed as a potential successor by many, notably by Mr. Blair's allies, he had turned down bids to run against Mr. Brown.
That all changed on Wednesday, when Mr. Miliband published an article in the Labour-linked Guardian newspaper that, to outsiders, looked like a benign call for Labour Party unity and renewal following a terrible by-election loss to Scottish separatists in the formerly safe Labour riding of Glasgow East.
But the article, written without the permission of 10 Downing St., immediately sent shock waves across British politics and media. This, everyone agreed, was the launch of a mutiny.
To insiders, its message stood out in bright red. First, while arguing that Labour could beat the Tories, it did not in any way defend the Prime Minister's leadership, or even mention his name.
Second, it was written in the language of a political campaign speech: "The times demand a radical new phase ... New Labour won three elections by offering real change, not just in policy but in the way we do politics. We must do so again."
The Times of London, on its front page, called it "the launch of his leadership bid." Most other media outlets followed, and the Ladbrokes betting agency immediately raised its odds on Mr. Miliband becoming Labour leader to 5 to 2.
Mr. Brown sent his loyal MPs - a dwindling group - to counterattack. "I would have sacked him. I think he's been grossly disloyal," MP Geraldine Smith said in an interview apparently authorized by Downing Street, calling Mr. Miliband a "non-entity." Her Labour colleague, Bob Marshall-Andrews, described the article as "pretty contemptible politics" and "duplicitous."
Those words might have worked better against an older and more battle-scarred challenger. But Mr. Miliband, formerly considered a brilliant policy mind but hardly a celebrity, has managed to capture the eye of the nation in a stunningly short period of time, and will be harder to dismiss.
He entered Labour politics 20 years ago as an office assistant, bringing with him a name that opened doors on the left. Mr. Miliband is the son of Ralph Miliband, the Marxist scholar who founded the New Left Review in the 1960s and whose works are known to almost everyone in the Labour Party. David's brother, Ed Miliband, is another member of Mr. Brown's cabinet.
At a moment when British politics, even in the Labour Party, is turning hostile to refugees, Mr. Miliband's experience provides a counterbalance. His parents, both Polish Jews, had fled Hitler's Holocaust across Europe, finally finding themselves in Belgium.
As the tanks approached, they tried to enter Britain legally, but were rebuffed by the Home Secretary, who happened to be the Tory MP for the riding Mr. Miliband now represents.
Fearing for their lives, the Milibands crossed into England as illegal immigrants, using forged papers. Despite this experience, the Milibands quickly rose in British academic life.
Their political dynasty has been pegged as a source of future leaders since David Miliband played a key role in drafting the New Labour manifestos that brought Tony Blair to office in 1997.
On Thursday, in a move widely seen as an effort to quell the unrest, Mr. Brown ordered Mr. Miliband to cancel a planned trip to India in early September, calling him and the rest of his cabinet to his official country residence to announce a large-scale cabinet shuffle.
Mr. Brown's aides said he hopes to rebuild public support for the party before the Labour and Tory conferences at the end of September, possibly by timing the shuffle to coincide with a special windfall tax on energy companies, a populist move likely to please beleaguered British voters.
The stakes are extremely high. Mr. Brown's popularity has fallen in the year since he succeeded Mr. Blair to the point that even Labour's safest seats are now up for grabs. Observers are seriously discussing the possibility that Mr. Brown, should he ever face a general election, worried he might lead his party to the sort of decimating defeat that completely eliminated Britain's Liberal Party a century ago or Canada's Progressive Conservatives 16 years ago.
While polls show that if an election were called today, Mr. Miliband would not beat Conservative Leader David Cameron - another youthful and unorthodox figure in British politics - he would stand a better chance of holding the party together and keeping its core of seats.
On the other hand, there is a strong desire to prevent the Labour conference in September from turning into a full-blown campaign against Mr. Brown, in which groups of MPs raise motions to unseat him in front of national TV cameras.
That would be almost unprecedented in modern British political history.
It would also likely be ineffective: The Labour constitution makes it almost impossible to unseat a sitting prime minister.
Mr. Brown, who succeeded Mr. Blair last year and does not have to call an election until 2010, shows no signs of wanting to step down voluntarily.
But Mr. Miliband's gambit, if that's what it was, seems to have had the desired effect: It has put him at the centre of national attention, ahead of more senior colleagues such as Justice Minister Jack Straw and cabinet member Ed Balls.
As Britain's most volatile government in a generation tries to relax on Europe's beaches, people are talking about the "prosecco plot" or the "cava coup," as the Prime Minister's downfall is planned over glasses of the fizzy wines. And the first name mentioned, thanks to a clever act of newspaper understatement, will be David Miliband.
From Monday's Globe and Mail
E-mail Doug Saunders Read Bio Latest Columns
August 4, 2008 at 3:56 AM EDT
LONDON — It is a very British coup that has broken out on the beaches of Europe as Prime Minister Gordon Brown's cabinet members begin their summer vacations with talk of insurrection.
Very British in its thrust, which has been both nasty and secretive: Mr. Brown is guilty of "hubris and vacuity," his leadership "a lamentable confusion of tactics and strategy," said a letter, apparently from former prime minister Tony Blair, that was leaked to the London tabloids this weekend in an apparent bid by Mr. Brown's cabinet challengers to undermine him.
And very British in its subtlety: It began with a newspaper article, written by one of Mr. Brown's closest colleagues, that seemed innocuous and even laudatory in its language, but whose coded messages were quicky interpreted by the entire country to be regicidal.
At its centre is a most unlikely Brutus, a 43-year-old child of Eastern European Jewish refugees whose freshman demeanour and intellectual, wonkish bearing seem out of place both in the aristocratic circles of Westminster and in the calloused world of Labour politics.
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, is both the youngest member of Mr. Brown's cabinet and, until a few days ago, considered among its most loyal. While this widely admired politician had frequently been listed as a potential successor by many, notably by Mr. Blair's allies, he had turned down bids to run against Mr. Brown.
That all changed on Wednesday, when Mr. Miliband published an article in the Labour-linked Guardian newspaper that, to outsiders, looked like a benign call for Labour Party unity and renewal following a terrible by-election loss to Scottish separatists in the formerly safe Labour riding of Glasgow East.
But the article, written without the permission of 10 Downing St., immediately sent shock waves across British politics and media. This, everyone agreed, was the launch of a mutiny.
To insiders, its message stood out in bright red. First, while arguing that Labour could beat the Tories, it did not in any way defend the Prime Minister's leadership, or even mention his name.
Second, it was written in the language of a political campaign speech: "The times demand a radical new phase ... New Labour won three elections by offering real change, not just in policy but in the way we do politics. We must do so again."
The Times of London, on its front page, called it "the launch of his leadership bid." Most other media outlets followed, and the Ladbrokes betting agency immediately raised its odds on Mr. Miliband becoming Labour leader to 5 to 2.
Mr. Brown sent his loyal MPs - a dwindling group - to counterattack. "I would have sacked him. I think he's been grossly disloyal," MP Geraldine Smith said in an interview apparently authorized by Downing Street, calling Mr. Miliband a "non-entity." Her Labour colleague, Bob Marshall-Andrews, described the article as "pretty contemptible politics" and "duplicitous."
Those words might have worked better against an older and more battle-scarred challenger. But Mr. Miliband, formerly considered a brilliant policy mind but hardly a celebrity, has managed to capture the eye of the nation in a stunningly short period of time, and will be harder to dismiss.
He entered Labour politics 20 years ago as an office assistant, bringing with him a name that opened doors on the left. Mr. Miliband is the son of Ralph Miliband, the Marxist scholar who founded the New Left Review in the 1960s and whose works are known to almost everyone in the Labour Party. David's brother, Ed Miliband, is another member of Mr. Brown's cabinet.
At a moment when British politics, even in the Labour Party, is turning hostile to refugees, Mr. Miliband's experience provides a counterbalance. His parents, both Polish Jews, had fled Hitler's Holocaust across Europe, finally finding themselves in Belgium.
As the tanks approached, they tried to enter Britain legally, but were rebuffed by the Home Secretary, who happened to be the Tory MP for the riding Mr. Miliband now represents.
Fearing for their lives, the Milibands crossed into England as illegal immigrants, using forged papers. Despite this experience, the Milibands quickly rose in British academic life.
Their political dynasty has been pegged as a source of future leaders since David Miliband played a key role in drafting the New Labour manifestos that brought Tony Blair to office in 1997.
On Thursday, in a move widely seen as an effort to quell the unrest, Mr. Brown ordered Mr. Miliband to cancel a planned trip to India in early September, calling him and the rest of his cabinet to his official country residence to announce a large-scale cabinet shuffle.
Mr. Brown's aides said he hopes to rebuild public support for the party before the Labour and Tory conferences at the end of September, possibly by timing the shuffle to coincide with a special windfall tax on energy companies, a populist move likely to please beleaguered British voters.
The stakes are extremely high. Mr. Brown's popularity has fallen in the year since he succeeded Mr. Blair to the point that even Labour's safest seats are now up for grabs. Observers are seriously discussing the possibility that Mr. Brown, should he ever face a general election, worried he might lead his party to the sort of decimating defeat that completely eliminated Britain's Liberal Party a century ago or Canada's Progressive Conservatives 16 years ago.
While polls show that if an election were called today, Mr. Miliband would not beat Conservative Leader David Cameron - another youthful and unorthodox figure in British politics - he would stand a better chance of holding the party together and keeping its core of seats.
On the other hand, there is a strong desire to prevent the Labour conference in September from turning into a full-blown campaign against Mr. Brown, in which groups of MPs raise motions to unseat him in front of national TV cameras.
That would be almost unprecedented in modern British political history.
It would also likely be ineffective: The Labour constitution makes it almost impossible to unseat a sitting prime minister.
Mr. Brown, who succeeded Mr. Blair last year and does not have to call an election until 2010, shows no signs of wanting to step down voluntarily.
But Mr. Miliband's gambit, if that's what it was, seems to have had the desired effect: It has put him at the centre of national attention, ahead of more senior colleagues such as Justice Minister Jack Straw and cabinet member Ed Balls.
As Britain's most volatile government in a generation tries to relax on Europe's beaches, people are talking about the "prosecco plot" or the "cava coup," as the Prime Minister's downfall is planned over glasses of the fizzy wines. And the first name mentioned, thanks to a clever act of newspaper understatement, will be David Miliband.
Recession just keeps rolling along.
Rolling Recessions Bring Paralysis to Bernanke, King, Trichet
By Rich Miller and Simon Kennedy
Aug. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Recessions are threatening to crash over the world economy in waves, as one country after another turns down a year after the onset of the global credit crisis.
Such rolling recessions pose a quandary for central bankers Ben S. Bernanke, Jean-Claude Trichet and Mervyn King:
If the whole world were clearly slumping, they'd be united in cutting interest rates. Instead, with some countries still booming, they can't ignore the inflation threat. Paralyzed between slowing growth and accelerating prices, U.S. and European policy makers this week are set to fall back on keeping rates unchanged.
``We're in a peculiar situation where, a year from now, we're likely to look back and say that monetary policy makers have made a very, very serious error,'' says David Lipton, head of global country-risk management for New York-based Citigroup Inc. ``The problem is, we don't know whether we're going to say they were too loose or too tight.''
A lot's at stake. If central bankers leave rates too low, they risk stoking global inflation that's already projected by the International Monetary Fund to be the fastest in nine years. Keep rates too high and the world could fall into its first recession since 2001-2002.
In the past, when the U.S. economy weakened, the rest of the world usually followed quickly, and inflation eased as demand for oil and other commodities fell. U.S. recessions in 1990-1991 and 2001 brought global growth down by half, sending fuel prices tumbling.
Slowdown Delayed
That didn't happen this time. The world expansion barely slowed last year and oil prices surged, even as the U.S. economy shrank in the fourth quarter. Only now -- two years after the U.S. housing boom went bust -- is the slowdown spreading worldwide and the price of oil showing signs of receding.
The world may avoid a recession, deemed by economists to be global growth of 3 percent or less, and still end up with what Allen Sinai, chief economist at Decision Economics in New York, calls a ``witches' brew'' of ailments: declines in the housing and stock markets, a credit crunch and commodity-driven inflation.
The energy and credit crises may have permanently weakened the global economy by making production and investment costlier. Deutsche Bank AG economists say long-term growth may fall to 4 percent from 5 percent.
`Weaker for Longer'
While the world rebounded from its last slump to record the strongest expansion since the 1970s, Richard Berner, co- head of global economics for Morgan Stanley in New York, says that ``growth will have to stay weaker for longer'' this time if central banks are to curb inflationary pressures. ``Investors should consider these developments as a regime change,'' Berner says.
The U.S. risks a relapse after bouncing up in the second quarter as consumers spent some of their $91 billion in tax rebates. ``I don't see recovery'' on the horizon, says Harvard University's Martin Feldstein, who serves on the National Bureau of Economic Research committee that determines when recessions start and end.
The big concern is that consumers -- whose spending accounts for more than 70 percent of the economy -- will cut back after their splurge. The omens aren't good: Overdue payments at the six largest credit-card lenders rose in June after falling the two previous months.
Division at Fed
Chairman Bernanke and his Fed colleagues are divided over what to do next after cutting rates to 2 percent from 5.25 percent a year ago. Some, including Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher, favor tighter credit now to contain inflation. A majority prefer to wait and see how the economy develops.
Kenneth Rogoff, a Harvard economics professor and former IMF chief economist, says Fed policy makers are ``stuck.'' While they may want to raise rates to 3 percent to head off inflationary pressures, they can't for fear of upsetting still- fragile financial markets. Consequently, they'll hold borrowing costs unchanged for ``an extended period,'' he says.
European Central Bank President Trichet's dilemma is similar. After dodging the U.S. slowdown last year, the 15- nation euro-area economy may have shrunk in the second quarter for the first time since the common currency's introduction in 1999. As in the U.S., housing booms in Spain, Portugal and Ireland are collapsing, while the euro's appreciation is hurting companies that export.
Recession Risk
``The risk of a recession is no longer negligible,'' says Holger Schmieding, chief European economist at Bank of America Corp. in London.
When a worldwide slump last began in 2001, the ECB cut interest rates. Not this time.
With inflation the fastest in more than 16 years, the bank raised rates to a seven-year high of 4.25 percent last month. Officials warn they'll do more if workers win big wage deals. Employees at Deutsche Lufthansa AG, Europe's second-biggest airline, last week ended a strike after winning a 5.1 percent pay increase retroactive to July 1, and an additional 2.3 percent increase next year.
``The ECB is clearly walking a tightrope,'' says Martin van Vliet, an economist at ING Bank in Amsterdam, who predicts the bank will keep its key rate unchanged until 2009. ``It has to balance the lingering risk of a wage-price spiral with prospective disinflationary pressures emanating from the downturn,'' he says.
Sharp Debate
The debate is sharper at Governor King's Bank of England. The U.K. is slipping toward its first recession since 1990 as house prices slide after tripling in the past decade. With inflation almost twice the bank's 2 percent target, King's policy panel split three ways last month; the majority voted to keep rates at 5 percent.
Japan, too, is at risk of a recession. Exports fell in June for the first time since 2003 and unemployment reached 4.1 percent, almost a two-year high. The Bank of Japan has little room to act, with its benchmark interest rate of just 0.5 percent and consumer prices rising at the fastest pace in a decade.
``The fog hanging over Japan's economy will stick around for the time being,'' bank board member Atsushi Mizuno said July 24.
Even Asia's rapidly growing emerging economies are showing signs of slowing. The region's policy makers are at odds over how to react as inflation remains high.
Chinese officials suggest they may seek to bolster their economy after growth slowed in the second quarter by the most since 2005. Others remain intent on curbing inflation. India has raised rates three times since May while suffering the weakest growth in five years. Surging food and energy costs prompted Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines to tighten credit in July.
``There's a kind of stagflation marching over the world economy,'' Sinai says. ``I hope policy makers are able to figure it out and make the right decisions to fight it.''
To contact the reporters on this story: Rich Miller in Washington at rmiller28@bloomberg.netSimon Kennedy in Paris at skennedy4@bloomberg.net Last Updated: August 3, 2008 18:00 EDT
By Rich Miller and Simon Kennedy
Aug. 4 (Bloomberg) -- Recessions are threatening to crash over the world economy in waves, as one country after another turns down a year after the onset of the global credit crisis.
Such rolling recessions pose a quandary for central bankers Ben S. Bernanke, Jean-Claude Trichet and Mervyn King:
If the whole world were clearly slumping, they'd be united in cutting interest rates. Instead, with some countries still booming, they can't ignore the inflation threat. Paralyzed between slowing growth and accelerating prices, U.S. and European policy makers this week are set to fall back on keeping rates unchanged.
``We're in a peculiar situation where, a year from now, we're likely to look back and say that monetary policy makers have made a very, very serious error,'' says David Lipton, head of global country-risk management for New York-based Citigroup Inc. ``The problem is, we don't know whether we're going to say they were too loose or too tight.''
A lot's at stake. If central bankers leave rates too low, they risk stoking global inflation that's already projected by the International Monetary Fund to be the fastest in nine years. Keep rates too high and the world could fall into its first recession since 2001-2002.
In the past, when the U.S. economy weakened, the rest of the world usually followed quickly, and inflation eased as demand for oil and other commodities fell. U.S. recessions in 1990-1991 and 2001 brought global growth down by half, sending fuel prices tumbling.
Slowdown Delayed
That didn't happen this time. The world expansion barely slowed last year and oil prices surged, even as the U.S. economy shrank in the fourth quarter. Only now -- two years after the U.S. housing boom went bust -- is the slowdown spreading worldwide and the price of oil showing signs of receding.
The world may avoid a recession, deemed by economists to be global growth of 3 percent or less, and still end up with what Allen Sinai, chief economist at Decision Economics in New York, calls a ``witches' brew'' of ailments: declines in the housing and stock markets, a credit crunch and commodity-driven inflation.
The energy and credit crises may have permanently weakened the global economy by making production and investment costlier. Deutsche Bank AG economists say long-term growth may fall to 4 percent from 5 percent.
`Weaker for Longer'
While the world rebounded from its last slump to record the strongest expansion since the 1970s, Richard Berner, co- head of global economics for Morgan Stanley in New York, says that ``growth will have to stay weaker for longer'' this time if central banks are to curb inflationary pressures. ``Investors should consider these developments as a regime change,'' Berner says.
The U.S. risks a relapse after bouncing up in the second quarter as consumers spent some of their $91 billion in tax rebates. ``I don't see recovery'' on the horizon, says Harvard University's Martin Feldstein, who serves on the National Bureau of Economic Research committee that determines when recessions start and end.
The big concern is that consumers -- whose spending accounts for more than 70 percent of the economy -- will cut back after their splurge. The omens aren't good: Overdue payments at the six largest credit-card lenders rose in June after falling the two previous months.
Division at Fed
Chairman Bernanke and his Fed colleagues are divided over what to do next after cutting rates to 2 percent from 5.25 percent a year ago. Some, including Dallas Fed President Richard Fisher, favor tighter credit now to contain inflation. A majority prefer to wait and see how the economy develops.
Kenneth Rogoff, a Harvard economics professor and former IMF chief economist, says Fed policy makers are ``stuck.'' While they may want to raise rates to 3 percent to head off inflationary pressures, they can't for fear of upsetting still- fragile financial markets. Consequently, they'll hold borrowing costs unchanged for ``an extended period,'' he says.
European Central Bank President Trichet's dilemma is similar. After dodging the U.S. slowdown last year, the 15- nation euro-area economy may have shrunk in the second quarter for the first time since the common currency's introduction in 1999. As in the U.S., housing booms in Spain, Portugal and Ireland are collapsing, while the euro's appreciation is hurting companies that export.
Recession Risk
``The risk of a recession is no longer negligible,'' says Holger Schmieding, chief European economist at Bank of America Corp. in London.
When a worldwide slump last began in 2001, the ECB cut interest rates. Not this time.
With inflation the fastest in more than 16 years, the bank raised rates to a seven-year high of 4.25 percent last month. Officials warn they'll do more if workers win big wage deals. Employees at Deutsche Lufthansa AG, Europe's second-biggest airline, last week ended a strike after winning a 5.1 percent pay increase retroactive to July 1, and an additional 2.3 percent increase next year.
``The ECB is clearly walking a tightrope,'' says Martin van Vliet, an economist at ING Bank in Amsterdam, who predicts the bank will keep its key rate unchanged until 2009. ``It has to balance the lingering risk of a wage-price spiral with prospective disinflationary pressures emanating from the downturn,'' he says.
Sharp Debate
The debate is sharper at Governor King's Bank of England. The U.K. is slipping toward its first recession since 1990 as house prices slide after tripling in the past decade. With inflation almost twice the bank's 2 percent target, King's policy panel split three ways last month; the majority voted to keep rates at 5 percent.
Japan, too, is at risk of a recession. Exports fell in June for the first time since 2003 and unemployment reached 4.1 percent, almost a two-year high. The Bank of Japan has little room to act, with its benchmark interest rate of just 0.5 percent and consumer prices rising at the fastest pace in a decade.
``The fog hanging over Japan's economy will stick around for the time being,'' bank board member Atsushi Mizuno said July 24.
Even Asia's rapidly growing emerging economies are showing signs of slowing. The region's policy makers are at odds over how to react as inflation remains high.
Chinese officials suggest they may seek to bolster their economy after growth slowed in the second quarter by the most since 2005. Others remain intent on curbing inflation. India has raised rates three times since May while suffering the weakest growth in five years. Surging food and energy costs prompted Indonesia, Thailand and the Philippines to tighten credit in July.
``There's a kind of stagflation marching over the world economy,'' Sinai says. ``I hope policy makers are able to figure it out and make the right decisions to fight it.''
To contact the reporters on this story: Rich Miller in Washington at rmiller28@bloomberg.netSimon Kennedy in Paris at skennedy4@bloomberg.net Last Updated: August 3, 2008 18:00 EDT
Are you about to become NEGATIVE?
Negative Equity To Hit 1.7m UK Homeowners?
Wednesday 30th July 2008
One in seven UK homeowners may face the threat of negative equity throughout the next year as the UK housing market takes a stranglehold, according to a report conducted by Standard & Poor..
The world’s largest credit rating agency’s findings suggest that around 70,000 of the UK’s 12m borrowers currently find themselves in negative equity mainly due to house prices falling in value at an alarming 26%, leading to a further 14% of homeowners slipping into negative equity due to their outstanding mortgages.
Such depressing figures could replicate the dark days of the 1990’s housing crash, where huge numbers of home owners were left financially crippled due to house price declines. Never has establishing the best financial mortgage package been so imperative.
The 70,000 predicted to suffer is already a far larger sum than first envisaged and this figure is expected to rise further with the news that the house price slump has upped its speed, falling 9% on last year, judged on S&P’s Nationwide and Halifax figures.
The ratings agency calculated that for with every percentage point drop in house price from now on, around 60,000 to 80,000 borrowers could realistically enter the dreaded realms of negative equity, with the high loan-to-value mortgages most at threat.
While Standard & Poor’s report agreed that prices are currently heading in a downward direction, with a further 17% fall forecasted, many experts predict a more optimistic outlook with many home owners taking up a mortgage worth more than 90% of the value of their home, allowing the chances of going into negative equity slim, even if house prices fell a realistic 10%.
The report declared, “The current run of house price declines raises the prospect of negative equity for a large number of homeowners, a situation not seen since the 1990’s house price recession.”
Wednesday 30th July 2008
One in seven UK homeowners may face the threat of negative equity throughout the next year as the UK housing market takes a stranglehold, according to a report conducted by Standard & Poor..
The world’s largest credit rating agency’s findings suggest that around 70,000 of the UK’s 12m borrowers currently find themselves in negative equity mainly due to house prices falling in value at an alarming 26%, leading to a further 14% of homeowners slipping into negative equity due to their outstanding mortgages.
Such depressing figures could replicate the dark days of the 1990’s housing crash, where huge numbers of home owners were left financially crippled due to house price declines. Never has establishing the best financial mortgage package been so imperative.
The 70,000 predicted to suffer is already a far larger sum than first envisaged and this figure is expected to rise further with the news that the house price slump has upped its speed, falling 9% on last year, judged on S&P’s Nationwide and Halifax figures.
The ratings agency calculated that for with every percentage point drop in house price from now on, around 60,000 to 80,000 borrowers could realistically enter the dreaded realms of negative equity, with the high loan-to-value mortgages most at threat.
While Standard & Poor’s report agreed that prices are currently heading in a downward direction, with a further 17% fall forecasted, many experts predict a more optimistic outlook with many home owners taking up a mortgage worth more than 90% of the value of their home, allowing the chances of going into negative equity slim, even if house prices fell a realistic 10%.
The report declared, “The current run of house price declines raises the prospect of negative equity for a large number of homeowners, a situation not seen since the 1990’s house price recession.”
House Price Crash ~ GOOD GOOD VERY GOOD
Everybody talks as if falling house prices are a bad thing, nay, a national disaster.
Rising house prices, the logic runs, are therefore a good thing.
But the reverse is true.
Right now, falling house prices are exactly what we need. You know it, I know it.
House prices dropped a record 8.1% over the past 12 months, according to Nationwide, the biggest drop since it started collecting figures in 1991. Other reports suggest that the value of your home could drop by as much as 30% by 2010.
Everybody pretends this is terrible news, but quite frankly, it isn't.
I would argue that most of us are delighted at the thought, and rightly so.
The press, of course, is revelling in all the doom and gloom, but headline-hungry journalists aren't the only ones getting excited by the housing market collapse.
Hoping for the worst
Many of us, not just first-time buyers and rivals for Gordon Brown's job, actively want prices to fall. We would be disappointed if they stabilised, and the housing market became tediously becalmed.
The forthcoming collapse has been so widely predicted that if it doesn't happen, we would all be crushed by the anti-climax.
There is also a collective – and very sensible – horror at the way house prices have spiralled beyond all logic in recent years. We're all financial puritans at heart.
Even people who have cashed in to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds have been appalled by this scarcely credible surge in values. If house prices can behave so irrationally, how rational is the rest of our financial system?
The party's over
Add to that widespread distaste at the orgy of debt the UK has indulged in lately, and you can see why many people have been howling for the party to come to an end. It may leave many of us nursing sore heads and negative equity, but we knew all along it would end in tears.
So who gets hurt by a crash? Some will find it painful, but not as many as you think. Existing homeowners may see up to 30% lopped off the value of their home, but their next property has also fallen by 30%, so where's the problem?
Even the 1.7 million that Standard & Poor's estimate face negative equity will only suffer if they absolutely need to move home in the next few years. If you are among their number, you have my sympathy.
Other homeowners will have a shrinking amount of equity to dip into, too. But given that the nation collectively owes £1.4 trillion, the last thing we need is more borrowing.
In my opinion, those who missed out on the house price bonanza should be popping champagne corks. Or better still, saving the money towards a deposit, to allow them to enter the property market at more affordable levels in a year or two.
Any fall must be set in the context of the astronomical gains in recent years. As Nationwide quickly points out, the average house is still worth £11,000 more than three years ago – although admittedly, maybe not for much longer.
So let's not get too carried away, it's not the end of the world as we know it, just an abrupt halt to its wilder excesses.
Short, sharp shock
A short, sharp property crash might do us all some good – and I do believe it is likely to be short and sharp.
Although unemployment is set to rise, it still remains at modest levels. Personal insolvencies and repossessions will increase, but many people will hang on by the skin of their teeth until the recovery comes.
There are also one or two pieces of good news floating around, overlooked in the current carnage.
Swap rates are falling and lenders are cutting their fixed-rate mortgages, which might ease some of the pain for those facing payment shock. Plus there is still a good chance that interest rates could start falling by the end of the year.
Reality bites
Add the fact that we live on a small, squeezed island with a pent-up demand for houses, and you can see the ground is clear for a relatively speedy recovery. But let's hope it isn't too speedy, because we don't want to find ourselves repeating the blunders of the past decade (and the decade before that).
Arguably, the crash is a much-needed jolt of economic reality, and is the first step towards restoring common sense to the property market, and the rest of the economy.
I'll say it again. Falling house prices are a good thing. Enjoy it while it lasts.
Rising house prices, the logic runs, are therefore a good thing.
But the reverse is true.
Right now, falling house prices are exactly what we need. You know it, I know it.
House prices dropped a record 8.1% over the past 12 months, according to Nationwide, the biggest drop since it started collecting figures in 1991. Other reports suggest that the value of your home could drop by as much as 30% by 2010.
Everybody pretends this is terrible news, but quite frankly, it isn't.
I would argue that most of us are delighted at the thought, and rightly so.
The press, of course, is revelling in all the doom and gloom, but headline-hungry journalists aren't the only ones getting excited by the housing market collapse.
Hoping for the worst
Many of us, not just first-time buyers and rivals for Gordon Brown's job, actively want prices to fall. We would be disappointed if they stabilised, and the housing market became tediously becalmed.
The forthcoming collapse has been so widely predicted that if it doesn't happen, we would all be crushed by the anti-climax.
There is also a collective – and very sensible – horror at the way house prices have spiralled beyond all logic in recent years. We're all financial puritans at heart.
Even people who have cashed in to the tune of hundreds of thousands of pounds have been appalled by this scarcely credible surge in values. If house prices can behave so irrationally, how rational is the rest of our financial system?
The party's over
Add to that widespread distaste at the orgy of debt the UK has indulged in lately, and you can see why many people have been howling for the party to come to an end. It may leave many of us nursing sore heads and negative equity, but we knew all along it would end in tears.
So who gets hurt by a crash? Some will find it painful, but not as many as you think. Existing homeowners may see up to 30% lopped off the value of their home, but their next property has also fallen by 30%, so where's the problem?
Even the 1.7 million that Standard & Poor's estimate face negative equity will only suffer if they absolutely need to move home in the next few years. If you are among their number, you have my sympathy.
Other homeowners will have a shrinking amount of equity to dip into, too. But given that the nation collectively owes £1.4 trillion, the last thing we need is more borrowing.
In my opinion, those who missed out on the house price bonanza should be popping champagne corks. Or better still, saving the money towards a deposit, to allow them to enter the property market at more affordable levels in a year or two.
Any fall must be set in the context of the astronomical gains in recent years. As Nationwide quickly points out, the average house is still worth £11,000 more than three years ago – although admittedly, maybe not for much longer.
So let's not get too carried away, it's not the end of the world as we know it, just an abrupt halt to its wilder excesses.
Short, sharp shock
A short, sharp property crash might do us all some good – and I do believe it is likely to be short and sharp.
Although unemployment is set to rise, it still remains at modest levels. Personal insolvencies and repossessions will increase, but many people will hang on by the skin of their teeth until the recovery comes.
There are also one or two pieces of good news floating around, overlooked in the current carnage.
Swap rates are falling and lenders are cutting their fixed-rate mortgages, which might ease some of the pain for those facing payment shock. Plus there is still a good chance that interest rates could start falling by the end of the year.
Reality bites
Add the fact that we live on a small, squeezed island with a pent-up demand for houses, and you can see the ground is clear for a relatively speedy recovery. But let's hope it isn't too speedy, because we don't want to find ourselves repeating the blunders of the past decade (and the decade before that).
Arguably, the crash is a much-needed jolt of economic reality, and is the first step towards restoring common sense to the property market, and the rest of the economy.
I'll say it again. Falling house prices are a good thing. Enjoy it while it lasts.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
