Bankers in Denial

Denial is a ubiquitous psychological defense mechanism. It involves the repression of , unpleasant information, and -inducing . Judging by the German press, the is in a state of denial regarding the waning health of its and the dwindling of its system.

Commerzbank, Germany’s fourth largest lender, saw its shares decimated by more than 80 percent to a 19-year low, having increased its -loss provisions to cover -submerged east German debts. Faced with a precipitous drop in net profit, it reacted reflexively by sacking yet more staff. The shares of many other German trade below book value.

Dresdner - Germany’s third largest private establishment - already trimmed an unprecedented one fifth of its workforce this year alone. Other leading German - such as Deutsche and Hypovereinsbank - resorted to panic selling of equity , real-estate, non-core activities, and securitized to patch up their ailing . Deutsche , for instance, unloaded its US leasing and custody businesses.

On September 19, Moody’s changed its outlook for Germany’s largest from “stable” to “negative”. In a scathing remark, it said:

“The rating agency stated several times already that difficult that are hurting the banking in Germany come on top of the legacy of past strategies that were less focused on strengthening the ’ recurring earning power. Indeed, the German private-sector , as a group, remain among the lowest-performing large European .”

Last week, Fitch Ratings, the international agency, followed suit and downgraded the long-term , short- term, and individual ratings of Dresdner and of Bayerische Hypo- und Vereinsbank (HVB).

These were only the last in a series of negative outlooks pertaining to German insurers and . It is ironic that Fitch cited the “bear equity (that) have taken their toll not only on results but also on to private customers, the fund management and on .”

Germans used to be immune to the exchange and its lures until they were caught in the frenzied global equities bubble. Moody’s observes wryly that “a material and stable retail franchise in its , even if more modestly profitable, can and does represent a reliable line of defence against temporary difficulties in and .”

The -laden and scandal-ridden Neuer Markt - Europe’s answer to America’s NASDAQ - as well as the SMAX exchange for small-caps were shut down last week, the former having a staggering 96 percent of its value since March 2000. This compared to Britain’s , which “only” half its worth. Even Britain’s infamous FTSE-TechMARK faded by a “mere” 88 percent.

Only 1 company floated on the Neuer Markt this year - compared to more than 130 two years ago. In an unprecedented show of “no-”, more than 40 companies withdrew their listings last year. The Duetsche Boerse promised to create two new classes of shares on the Frankfurt Exchange. It belatedly vowed to introduce more and openness to .

have been accused by irate customers of helping to list inappropriate firms and providing fraudulent advisory services. Court cases are pending against the likes of Commerzbank. These may dash the ’s hopes to move from retail into .

To further compound matters, Germany is in the throes of a tsunami of insolvencies. This long-overdue restructuring, though beneficial in the long run, couldn’t have transpired at a worse time, as far as the go. Massive provisions and write-downs have voraciously consumed their base even as operating have plummeted. This double whammy more than eroded the of their painful cost-cutting .

German - not unlike Japanese ones - maintain incestuous with their clients. When it finally collapsed in April, Philip Holzmann AG owed to Deutsche with whom it had a cordial working for more than a century. But the also owned 19.6 percent of the ailing construction behemoth and chaired its supervisory board - the relics of previous shambolic rescue packages.

Germany competes with Austria in over-branching, with in souring , and with Russia in overhead. According to the German daily, Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, the cost to income ratio of German is 90 percent. Mass and - voluntary or enforced - are unavoidable, especially in the cooperative, , and savings sectors, concludes the paper. The process is a decade-old. More than 1500 vanished from the German landscape in this period. Another 2500 remain making Germany still one of the most over-banked countries in the world.

Moody’s don’t put much in the cost-cutting of the German . Added competition and a “more realistic pricing” of and services are far more important to their shriveling . But “that light is not yet visible at the end of the tunnel … and challenging conditions are likely to persist for the time being.”

The woeful state of Germany’s system reflects not only Germany’s economic malaise - “The Economist” called it the “sick man” of Europe - but its failed to imitate and emulate the inimitable centers of London and New-York. It is a rebuke to the misguided that capitalistic - and - can be transplanted in their entirety across cultural barriers. It is incontrovertible that - and the core competencies it spawns - still matter.

When German insurers and , for instance, branched into faddish businesses - such as the Internet and mobile telephony - they did so in vacuum. Germany has few venture capitalists and American-style entrepreneurs. This misguided resulted in a frightening erosion of the strength and base of the intrepid .

In a sense, Germany - and definitely its eastern Lander - is a in . -aversion is giving way to -seeking in the forms of in equities and derivatives and venture . Family ownership is gradually supplanted by exchange listings, imported management, and mergers, acquisitions, and takeovers - both friendly and hostile. The social contracts regarding employment, , the role of the trade unions, the balance between and pecuniary , and the carving up of - are being re-written.

Global integration means that, as sovereignty is transferred to supranational entities, the cozy between the and the German government on all levels is over. Last October, Hans Eichel, the German minister, announced OECD-inspired anti- laundering that are likely to secrecy and client anonymity and, thus, hurt the German - sometimes murky - banking . Erstwhile rampant government intervention is now mitigated or outright prohibited by the .

Thus, German Laender are forced, by the European Commission, to partly abolish, three years hence, their to the Landesbanken (regional development ) and Sparkassen (thrifts). German to Austria and central and east Europe will provide only temporary respite. As the EU enlarges and digests, at the very least, the Czech Republic, Hungary, and Poland in 2004-5 - German franchises there will come under the uncompromising remit of the Commission once more.

In general, Germans fared worse than Austrians in their extraterritorial banking ventures. Less cosmopolitan, with less exposure to the parts of the former Habsburg Empire, and struggling with a stagnant domestic - German found it difficult to turn central European around as successfully as the likes of the Austrian Erste did. They did make into structured in north Europe and the USA - but these seem to be random excursions rather a studied shift of emphasis.

On the bright side, Moody’s - though it maintains a negative outlook on German banking - noted, in November 2001, the ’ “intrinsic strength and diversified operating base”. reform and the hesitant introduction of private are also cause for restrained .

Pursuant to the purchase of Drsedner by Allianz, Moody’s welcome the of bancassurance and Allfinanz - services one stop shops. German are also positioned to reap the of their considerable in e-commerce, , and the restructuring of their branch networks.

The on 1929-1936 may have started with the meltdown of , especially that of - but it was exacerbated by the of the concatenated system. The is even more integrated. The of one or more major German can result in dire consequences and not only in the zone. The IMF says as much in its “World Economic Outlook” published on September 25.

The Germans deny this - and the diagnosis - vehemently. Bundesbank President Ernst Welteke - a board member of the European Central - spent the better part of last week implausibly denying any crisis in German banking. These are mere “structural problems in the weak phase”, he told a press conference. Nothing can’t solve.

It is this consistent refusal to confront reality that is the most worrisome. In the short to medium term, German are likely to outlive the storm. In the process, they will lose their iron grip on the domestic as customer loyalty dissipates and competition increases. If they do not confront their plight with and open-mindedness, they may well be reduced to glorified back-office extensions of the global giants.

About The Author

Sam Vaknin is the author of Malignant Self - Narcissism Revisited and After the Rain - How the West the East. He is a for Central Europe , PopMatters, and eBookWeb , a United Press International (UPI) Senior Correspondent, and the editor of and Central East Europe categories in The Open Directory Bellaonline, and Suite101 .

Until recently, he served as the Economic Advisor to the Government of Macedonia.

Visit Sam’s Web site at http://samvak.tripod.com; palma@unet.com.mk

Online Forex Trading Made Easy

There was a time when online was limited mostly to and big and they were the ones benefiting from it. But times changed and the availability of internet and online made it accessible to thousands of individuals, brokers, firms, and . Now, the is for anyone to reap who deals in it.

This mind boggling increase in online was brought by a of factors. One can trade round the irrespective of geographical location and that has been the single most important factor contributing to its exponential growth. Estimates claim that the daily transactions have scaled almost two- dollars! In addition to this, there are a number of other factors.

A is gets to trade in different in different all at once. It is all because of web based . What has this done is that it has allowed the infusion of a of and in online . What is more, a can easily access and make in with online transactions.

The biggest of online is that it has done away with bulls and bears. So, this is the only without any bulls and bears. Value or ratio of value of the or the direction of its movement has relatively no overall impact on the world of online . To make it more simple; any can at the same time in different without any problems.

Another defining feature of online is its . Nothing is hidden. It is comparatively easier to spot trends and decide the to sell or purchase. This is possible because all the information is there in from all over the .

Everything is out there for anyone and everyone to look at. Online involves no hidden costs, no exchange fees, no commission and nothing like that. All of this has made online very easy.

Another remarkable feature of online is the speed with which everything happens. There is nothing like delays here. You need virtually seconds to execute any trade and to fill and confirm it. All the information is provided by brokers and companies in and that is really crucial for making important .

I would like to end this discussion by giving a look at the of online . It might seem the best way to put your but not everyone who invested in online made . There are reasons behind it.

Online is in reality risky where split second are needed which could make or mar your . It is therefore essential for anyone who is interested in this field to understand it well before making any decision.

Paul Bryant is a successful and experienced and also the webmaster for http://www.investawise.com, bringing you all the latest news, reviews and .

Lessons From Long-Term Capital Management

Background

Long Term Management(LTCM) was a hedge fund established in 1994 by John Meriwether, a very successful bond at Salomon Brothers. At Salomon, Meriwether was one of the first on to hire top academics and . Meriwether established a team of academics who applied based on theories to . At Salomon, Meriwether’s group of geniuses generated amazing returns and demonstrated an unparalleled ability to precisely calculate and other factors.

In 1994, Meriwether left Salomon and established LTCM. The partners included two Nobel Price-winning , a former vice chairman of the Board of Governors of the , a professor from Harvard University, and other successful bond traders. This group of traders and academics attracted initial of about $1.3 billion from many large institutional clients.

The of LTCM was simple in concept but difficult to implement. LTCM utilized computer to find arbitrage opportunities between . LTCM’s central was convergence where were incorrectly priced relative to one another. LTCM would take long positions on the under priced security and short positions on the overpriced security.

LTCM engaged in this in international bond , emerging , , and other . LTCM would make when these spreads shrunk and returned to the fair value. Later, when LTCM’s base increased the fund engaged in strategies outside their expertise such as merger arbitrage and S&P 500 .

These strategies, however, focused on tiny price differences. Myron Scholes, one of the partners, stated that “LTCM would function like a giant vacuum cleaner sucking up nickels that everyone else had overlooked.” To make a significant profit on small differences in value, the hedge fund took high-leveraged positions. At the start of 1998, the fund had of about $5 billion and had borrowed about $125 billion.

Results

LTCM achieved outstanding returns initially. Before fees, the fund earned 28% in 1994, 59% in 1995, 57% in 1996, and 27% in 1997. LTCM earned these returns with surprisingly little . Through April 1998, the value of one initially invested increased to $4.11.

However, in mid 1998 the fund began to experience . These were further compounded when Salomon Brothers exited the arbitrage . Later in the year, Russia defaulted on government , a LTCM holding. panicked and sold Japanese and European and bought U.S. treasury . Thus, spreads between LTCM’s holding increased, causing the arbitrage to lose huge amounts. LTCM $1.85 billion in by the end of August 1998.

Spreads between LTCM’s arbitrage continued to widen and the fund experienced a flight to causing to shrink in the first 3 weeks of September from $2.3 billion to $600 million. Although decreased, because of the use of the portfolio value did not shrink. However, the decrease in elevated the the fund’s . Ultimately, the of New York catalyzed a $3.625 billion bail-out by the major institutional in order to avoid a wider in the caused LTCM’s dramatic and huge derivatives positions. At the end of September 1998, the value of one initially invested decreased to $.33 before fees.

Lessons from LTCM’s

1.Limitation of Excess Use

When engaging in strategies based on converging from price to an estimated fair price, managers must be able to have a long term and be able to withstand unfavorable price changes. When using dramatic , the ability of to be invested long term during unfavorable price changes is limited by the of the . Normally, lose during crisis, when need the . If forced to during an illiquid crisis, the fund will fail.

LTCM’s use of also highlighted the lack of regulation in the over-the-counter () derivatives . Many of the and reporting requirements established in other , such as , were not present in the derivatives . This lack of caused the risks of LTCM’s dramatic to not be completely recognized.

The of LTCM does not mean that any use of is bad, but highlights the potential negative consequences of using excessive .

2.Importance of Management

LTCM failed to manage multiple aspects of internally. Managers mostly focused on theoretical and not enough on liquid , , and -testing.

With such large positions, LTCM should have focused more on . LTCM’s model’s underestimated the of a crisis and potential for a flight to .

LTCM’s also assumed that long and short positions were highly correlated. This was historically based. Past results do not guarantee future results. By testing the model for the potential of lower correlations, could have been better managed.

In addition to LTCM, the hedge fund’s large institutional failed to properly manage . Impressed by the fund’s all star traders and large amount of , many provided very generous , even though the engaged in significant . Also, many failed to understand their total exposure to specific . During a crisis, exposure in multiple areas of a to specific risks can cause dramatic damage.

3.Supervision

LTCM failed to have a truly independent check on traders. Without this supervision, traders were able to create positions that were too risky.

LTCM demonstrates an interesting case of the limitations of predictions based on historical information, and the importance of recognizing potential of . In addition, the story of LTCM illustrates the of limited in derivatives .

To learn more about and , please visit the Sharpe Investing blog.

Matt Golberg is a major and attending a well regarded school.