It’s Super Monday

The world changed this morning. It’s being called Super Monday. Until recently, governments around the world were mild mannered, back seat drivers. But they spent this weekend changing their attire, and this morning stepped out with red cloak flaring, x-ray eyes boring, steel in their veins.

It was perhaps the most dramatic weekend yet, and this morning will go down in history as a key moment in this saga. British taxpayers also woke up to the news that they now own RBS, and have big chunks of Lloyds TSB and HBOS.

But to tell the story of this most dramatic stage yet in this, the great crisis of 2008, let’s begin at the beginning. It is just worth remembering the sheer scale of share price losses last week. The FTSE 100 lost 21 per cent of its value, so too did the DAX in Germany. The Dow didn’t fall quite so sharply – down 18 per cent, but only because it suffered bigger losses the week before. In Japan, the Nikkei was down 24 per cent. But the losses were not restricted to the developed world. The last few weeks have seen shares crash across the world, in China, India and Russia.

Then on Friday, the IMF rattled a few nerves. Usually you have to read IMF statements two or three times before their true meaning sinks in. Not this time; they couldn’t have put it more bluntly. Yesterday (Sunday), Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the IMF chief, said: “Intensifying solvency concerns about a number of the largest US-based and European financial institutions have pushed the global financial system to the brink of systemic meltdown.”

At first, the signs from finance ministers weren’t good. They uttered lots of soft words, and talked about a five-point plan to save the banking system, but there was no real substance. To put it into boxing terminology, they talked the talk, but they didn’t seem willing to walk the walk.

But this morning it seemed to change. And it changed in the UK first.

RBS is to be on the receiving end of a £20bn government investment. Taxpayers will then own 60 per cent of the business, so, in effect, RBS will be a government-owned bank. So the government banking portfolio will consist of Northern Rock, Bradford and Bingley and RBS. Or, to put it another way, Nat West is now a government-owned brand. “There has to be a better way,” the Nat West used to say. Well, those words may have proven prophetic in a way that just wasn’t intended.

Sir Ron Goodwin, the boss of RBS, who presided over the purchase of ABN Amro, and insisted the bank would not need to raise more money, is out. His departure seemed to be about as inevitable as the forthcoming departure of Peter Mandelson, who is bound to succumb to the new media/union witch-hunt which has already begun.

HBOS is to receive £11.6bn, Lloyds TSB £5.5bn, and assuming the merger goes ahead the government will hold a 40 per cent stake in the new bank.

Barclays, which was lucky enough to fail in the battle to gain control of ABN Amro last year, reckons it can stay independent, and is raising £6.5bn from private investors.

However, so well has the plan gone down, that it appears private investors are coming out of the woodwork, and putting up a lot more money than was originally anticipated. It seems the government may not, ultimately, put up quite so much money, and its equity stake may be smaller as a response.

It seems likely governments in Europe will be announcing similar packages soon, and probably today.

The US government seems to be lagging behind the curve, but it has hinted at a similar scheme itself.

As a by-product of all this, Gordon Brown seems to be emerging as the key international figure. As was predicted here three weeks ago, in ‘Is Brown set to see his Falklands moment?’, the British PM may be achieving something that was considered unthinkable, and is restoring his political credibility almost as quickly as he lost it.

At the time of writing, stock markets have roared their approval, with sharp rises seen in the UK and mainland Europe. Frustratingly, US stock markets are closed today, so we will have to wait until Wednesday morning to shed light on the US reaction.

The British government has played this well.

But it is a mistake to think all the problems are behind us. Sure, the possibility of a global banking crisis, creating a global economic depression, leading to all kinds of dangers, has diminished.

Neither does it mean that the good times are here again. Nationalised banks, even partially nationalised banks, are not the best institutions to sit at the core of the global economy. Banks such as Barclays, HSBC and Santander, which are able to avoid giving away government stakes, could yet scoop up the cream.

And even if the banking crisis has seen its worst – and let’s hope it has – the real economy is only just feeling the effect. Hopefully, governments have taken an important step in ensuring the world does not see economic depression, but recession is unavoidable.

On the Today programme this morning, one stockbroker talked about recession as being a good outcome. Effectively he said at least we can deal with recession, we have seen it before, and we know it will pass.

Maybe, thanks to a quite impressive government accord, the worst-case scenario is now looking less likely. But this does not mean recession can be avoided – if governments can stop that from happening, then Superman really would have to run the show.

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Lloyds TSB HBOS deal hits trouble- only super salesman Gordon can save the day

So the spivs are getting the blame again.  Several days after the government banned short-selling,  speculators are being blamed for causing another crash in the HBOS share price.

Those very same newspapers that talked up house prices shamelessly,  are,  from the warmth of their glass houses,  throwing stones at the people they claim are responsible for this crisis.

The HBOS share price went into free fall,  creating a question mark over the merger with Lloyds TSB,  and it’s all the fault of the spivs,  apparently.

This is the problem.  Lloyds TSB is offering 0.833 shares for every HBOS share,  but,  of course,  its shareholders have to agree to the deal.  But since the offer was made,  the HBOS share prices has tanked.

Never fear,  Brown is here.  Gordon Brown,  who was undoubtedly the best chancellor in the UK ever had during the ten year period from 1997 to 2007,  is going to come to the rescue.

“I am confident that the Lloyds TSB takeover of HBOS will go ahead.”

Yet, he also said this was a  “matter for shareholders not a matter for Government.”

So what a kafuffle.  If you are a shareholder in Lloyds TSB,  don’t be surprised if you get a phone call from a rather ponderous sounding Scotsman,  trying to persuade you to vote yes.  Or Maybe,  Gordon should take leaf out of the Lib Dems books, and arrange a recorded phone call.

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

HBOS – the panic, the reason and the black horse that rides to the rescue

If AIG is too important to fail in the US, then HBOS is too important to fail in the UK. Yesterday saw its share price collapse. Maybe, though, a rider on his black horse is coming to the rescue. Maybe we can thank speculators for the speedy resolution of this potential catastrophe.

It was those dreaded speculators, selling shares they didn’t own, that got the blame. And we recall the comments made by Warren Buffett a couple of years ago, describing derivatives as “financial weapons of mass destruction.”

At first, it seemed as if there was a very real prospect of a Northern Rock style bank run. Instead, it seems as if we are to see a new super-bank. What will it be called? The name HBOS doesn’t really fall off the tongue. Lloyds TSB is a bit of a mouthful. Do the letters TSB, H, BOS and Lloyds make an anagram? What word can you make from that? Any ideas, anyone?

We can blame the speculators, but it was hard, cold analysis that sparked the fears in the first place. Credit ratings agency Standard and Poor’s said that HBOS was “less well positioned to manage the deteriorating operating environment” than its rivals.

And then it was that Northern Rock moment of déjà vu.

HBOS said: “The group continues to access the wholesale money markets where appropriate. HBOS has a strong capital base. HBOS is a strong bank.”

The Financial Services Authority threw their weight into the melee saying: “HBOS has a strong capital base and continues to fund satisfactorily.”

You will recall what happens when we are told there is no reason to panic.

And that really became the danger. It is not that HBOS isn’t solvent, or doesn’t have good reason to say it has a strong capital base. But if, for whatever reason, its customers stop believing that, and rush down to their local branch to withdraw their money, then the very thing they fear could be forced to happen.

In some ways the danger was this. Since the Fed let Lehman fail, some may have feared the Bank of England was going to let the same fate fall upon HBOS. The Bank of England was never going to let HBOS go bust. But panic itself can create the thing the panickers are fearing.

It is interesting to speculate whether the HBOS Lloyds TSB merger would be going ahead without the Lehman debacle. Maybe the banks themselves took one look at what had happened to Lehman and made up their mind quick, forcing such precipitate action.

Maybe the failing of Lehman has forced the banks to get their act together. And maybe the dreaded speculators have forced the pace, making it all happen much quicker than it would have done. In that one respect, it is just possible the speculators did us all a favour.

Japan’s lost decade was caused because it took too long for reality to strike home. Speculators are forcing us to accept reality a lot quicker than we may want to, but maybe it is all for the best.

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

RBS announces its first-ever loss

And so RBS reveals its first ever half yearly loss in the forty years since it became a public listed company. It was also the second largest loss ever revealed by a British bank. Only Lloyds has ever managed to out do it, but that was back in 1989, and over Latin American debt.

Of the big five, RBS is the first bank to reveal a credit crunch related loss. But the key question is this: Is the worst now over, can we look forward to improved bank results, or is this just the thin end of the wedge?

RBS lost £691m in total – that is bad, but then again, consider this in the light of a £5bn profit in the same period last year, and while the decline in its fortunes is worrying, it is not as if the bank doesn’t have years of cumulative profit to fall back on.

Also, consider the losses in the light of the £12bn or so the bank has raised through selling shares lately.

These days, the strength of a bank’s balance sheet is measured by something called a Tier 1 Capital Ratio. This takes cumulative pre tax profit minus dividends, adds this to all investment the bank has received though the sale of shares, and then states this total value as a proportion of risk-weighted assets.

RBS now has a tier 1 capital ratio of 5.8 – that is after taking into account the sale of the bank’s stake in Tesco Personal Finance. To put that in context, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision says banks should have a tier 1 capital ratio of at least 4 per cent. Barclays recently said it has a tier 1 capital ratio of 6,3; HSBC 8.8; Lloyds 7.4; and HSBC 6.5 per cent.

To put it another way, despite the massive fund-raising, the RBS has a lower tier 1 captial ratio than any of its four main UK rivals.

And the reason is easy to see. RBS, Santander of Spain and Fortis of Belgium forked out $110bn to purchase ABN Amro last year.

Although Santander seems to have absorbed its share of the takeover in its stride, both Fortis and RBS have had to get shareholders to stump up money, even though both the banks at first said this would not be necessary.

Mind you, there was some good news from RBS. The loss was much lower than expected.

In part this was because the bank has had some luck selling leveraged loans at a higher price than it had expected. The bank saw an £182m reduction in the value of its debt.

What about the future? Sir Fred Goodwin, chief executive at the bank said: “It doesn’t feel like we’re heading back to the good old days, but we are seeing some movement,” and he added: “Its a brave person that can try and predict this market through year-end, but we feel these are strong marks and we have a reasonable degree of confidence. We’re still reducing exposure. We feel more comfortable with these marks now than at the end of April.”

The big snag, though, with all the write-downs announced by the banks so far, is that it seems unlikely that, moving forward, they have taken sufficient account of the effect the credit crunch will have on indebted UK consumers.

It may be that we have seen the majority of US subprime write-downs taken into account now, but the US and UK property markets have an important difference.

As is explained in the article below – “House prices fall again, but at least they rise in the US,” in the US, the banks often have to pay the cost of the negative equity in a mortgage. In the UK, most of us with negative equity have to just struggle on. Meaning, the effect of negative equity could take longer to be felt in the UK.

The underlying forces that shape the economy can affect different sectors at different times. At the moment, it is the banks who are feeling the full force of the credit crunch. Over the next year or two, it will be business and consumers.

The economist Hyman Minsky once talked about three stages in the development of a credit bubble. Stage 1, borrowing is affordable. Stage 2, borrowers can’t afford to repay the loan, but they can afford to pay interest. Stage 3, they can’t even afford the interest, and may borrow from elsewhere to repay existing loans. Then, all of a sudden, credit dries up – backlash against the untenable borrowing occurs – this is called the Minsky moment.

For many consumers it seems as if they are close to reaching that Minsky moment. This will be the point of maximum danger for the economy. It seems that as consumers find they are no longer able to borrow to repay borrowing, defaults will rise.

Businesses could face a double blow. As the economy slows they may need to borrow more, but for many, the credit crunch will make this impossible.

As a result, British banks could face rising defaults from both consumers and business – and for those reasons, it is quite possible bank losses have further to rise.

Bank first half profits in £bn

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

A tale of four companies – BP and Shell score, Lloyds and HBOS routed

Talking of dichotomy, consider this one. Today, HBOS and Shell released their latest results. Earlier in the week, it was Lloyds TSB and BP. And what a contrast! Okay, we all know the reason for the contrast, but it is worth pausing for a couple of minutes to delve a little deeper into these two extremes, crashing bank profits and surging oil company profits.

Profits at HBOS were down 72 per cent in the first six months. Profits at Lloyds TSB were 70 per cent down.

The Lloyds insurance business lost £505 million thanks to a fall in the value of its stock market investments. At the same time, it had to write off £585 million due to the fall in value of assets such as the now infamous CDOs – or collateralised Debt Obligations.

HBOS saw bad debts amount to £1.3bn.

In all, Lloyds made a profit of £599m from £1.99bn a year ago, and HBOS £848m from £2.962bn a year ago.

Although HBOS saw a slightly bigger drop in profits, in a way Lloyds saw the worst performance, considering. Remember, HBOS includes Halifax, until a few days ago the UK’s number one mortgage lender. Lloyds on the other hand is on the fringes of mortgage lending. So you would expect HBOS to suffer far more than Lloyds TSB.

But over the year that follows, expect Lloyds to enjoy a relative benefit from its lack of UK mortgage exposure.

By contrast, BP saw profits surge 6 per cent, with replacement cost profit after tax hitting $6.85bn (£3.4bn) between April and June. Profits came in at $6.5bn in the same quarter a year ago. As for its first half, BP made a profit of $13.4bn, 23 per cent up on last year.

Royal Dutch Shell saw profits leap 4.6 per cent, hitting $7.9bn (£4bn) in its latest quarter.

In a way, of course, the surging profits and escalating losses have the same cause.

The credit crunch has its roots in the way the global economy has been out of balance. The developed world is spending, and the developing world is saving and investing. This created a surge in debt, and a surge in commodity prices.

The debt bubble has burst. It is just a matter of time before the commodity bubble bursts too.

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

HBOS rights issue –just 8 per cent of shareholders put their money where the bank’s mouth is

Well, shareholders in HBOS, the Bank of England, and maybe just about all of us, need to be grateful for Morgan Stanley and Dresdner.

The bank’s attempt to shore up its balance sheet by raising £4bn has been a disaster. Only 8 per cent or so of shareholders subscribed to the rights issue. It is hardly surprising. Existing shareholders were offered the opportunity to buy two new shares for every five shares they already owned, at a price of 275p. When the rights issue was announced the HBOS share price was around 500p. So it seemed like a good deal at the time.

Morgan Stanley and Dresdner certainly seemed to think it was a good deal, which was why they were willing to underwrite the issue.

But then the share price fell, fell and fell some more, so that today it has been hovering around the rights issue price all day.

The two underwriters are trying to offload the shares – but this creates the danger that a share price crash could be precipitated.

HBOS went to lengths to point out it has raised the money. So we don’t need to worry. Well, maybe we don’t for now. But, presumably, all this will blow a hole in Morgan Stanley and Dresdner’s balance sheets, which they may need to eventually plug via their own fund-raising efforts.

But the big worry must surely relate to what happens if HBOS needs to go out and raise some more. And for that matter, it is leaving all banks who are hoping to raise some readies looking vulnerable.

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Banks and builders try to find right stuff

Rights issues are in the news again. Bradford and Bingley has turned Clive Cowdery, its would-be investor, away with a  flea in his ear.  HBOS’s share price seems to be fluctuating up and down and around its planned rights issue price – leaving the fundraising in doubt one moment, and sure to go ahead the next; and now Britain’s biggest house builder, Taylor Wimpey, has joined the fundraising trail.

For Bradford and Bingley, it all seemed a tad odd.  On the face of it Clive Cowdrey’s offer, via his vehicle Resolution, seems to win hands down over the plan B&B had hatched.  Yet the bank wouldn’t even let him view its accounts.

The snag was really two-fold.  Firstly it didn’t know, secondly it couldn’t dare.

It didn’t really know for sure that Resolution could put up the money it had outlined.  Secondly, it was scared of losing TPG, the investor it had already found.  You see, TPG’s offer is pretty firm, Resolution’s had a shadow of doubt.   If it turned TPG away, and then Resolution didn’t come through, then the fear was TPG would not come back.   And it appears this was a scenario it just couldn’t dare allow to happen.   That the bank was scared to lose one deal, even though another deal seemed so much better, does appear to tell us something, however.     It tells us about the nature of Bradford and Bingley’s balance sheet, and how much it needs the cash injection.

Meanwhile, HBOS is seeking to raise £4bn.  Trouble is, the money was to be raised via a rights issue at £275p a share – but since the bank revealed its plans for this issue, the share price has been fluctuating around the level of the rights issue.

The whole point of a rights issue, from an investor’s point of view, is that you are supposed to acquire shares quite cheaply, so on the face of it there is no point in taking part in the rights issue. But here is the odd thing.  HBOS shareholders can sell their entitlement to take part in the rights issue on the open market.  This is known as nil-paid rights.

Now, on the face of it, you would expect the price of nil-paid rights to be exactly the same as the difference between the actual HBOS share price and the rights issue price – which is roughly zero.   (Well, actually, you would expect the nil-paid rights to have a slight premium because these rights are free of stamp duty.)

But at close of play on Friday, the nil-paid rights were trading at around 15p. Far more than can be explained by the stamp-duty differential.  So it seems the market for nil-paid rights thinks the market for ordinary shares is wrong – that the HBOS share price has been driven too low by speculation, perhaps.

Finally, there’s Taylor Wimpey.  It is knocking £660 million off the value of its land and property holdings, and raising £500 million.

Now, a year ago, when the company was formed with the merger of George Wimpey and Taylor Woodrow, its land holdings were valued at £6bn. So that means it has written off just over 10 per cent of these assets. If house prices fall by a total of 20 per cent or more, then presumably it will have to write off more from the value of these assets.  Total bank lending to the company is in the region of £1.9bn.

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit

Will HBOS boss its underwriters?

But then again, things are not much better for HBOS, and for that matter Morgan Stanley and Dresdner Kleinwort must be somewhat irked.

If you can call being forced to stump up £4bn being irked, that is.

The investment bank duo agreed to underwrite the HBOS rights issue at 275p a share. That was back in April – a month which saw the bank’s share price fluctuate between 600 and around 480p.

At the time of writing, the HBOS share price is just 263p.

It is difficult to imagine why anyone would support a rights issue for a price which is higher than the trading price. 

This leaves just three options. Option 1, force Morgan Stanley and Dresdner Kleinwort to buy all the shares they underwrote.  They did, after all, get a nice fat fee for underwriting it.

Option 2, change the rights issue – reduce the price – but by how much will they have to reduce it?

Option 3 – go to an outside investor – but again, at what price?

Yesterday, the bank put out a terse statement saying: “Current trading and specifically mortgage-arrears performance was in line with the Group’s expectations.”

Maybe, but we are sure share trading isn’t in line with expectations.

As was said above while discussing Barratt, investors’ appetite for supporting rights issues must be waning.    The continual fall in banking shares must make this appetite even more satiated.
 

Bookmark this article: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • blogmarks
  • BlogMemes
  • Reddit