Thursday, May 12, 2011

European Policymakers Play a Game of Chicken

by Don Alexander, MBA

Associate, RSD Solutions Inc.

www.RSDsolutions.com

info@RSDsolutions.com 


Alessandro Leipold, a former IMF Director for Europe, wrote an interesting e-commentary for the Lisbon Council called Thinking the Unthinkable: Lessons of Past Sovereign Debt Restructurings.  The main message was that the longer policymakers delay the inevitable, the greater the potential loss of economic output and the greater the amount of good money that will be thrown after bad in the form of higher bailouts.  The result is higher potential losses for bondholders in the form of haircuts.  The real problem is the capital shortfall of European banks relative to their exposure to peripheral European countries.  It will become more problematic unless they admit to potential problems.  Policymakers continue to treat it as a liquidity problem not solvency.

 

Sovereign debt restructurings – in the form of either negotiated agreements or outright unilateral defaults – have been around the global financial system for centuries. The spreading contagion, due to policymaker’s weak response, has forced from one of outright denial to recognition of the need “ private-sector involvement” – another way to say debt restructuring – as part of the solution. The author draws on five lessons from past restructurings: (1) avoid detrimental delays, (2) repair the banking system, (3) remove politics, (4) stay ahead of the curve with pre-emptive exchange offers, and (5) do not expect too much from collective action clauses. The key focus is on the debt restructuring process itself, the need for a sense of urgency and the inclusion of all interested parties to avoid political delay.

 

The attention to prompt action helps to reduce financial market uncertainty and provide greater transparency to investors.  There is a need for policymakers to deal promptly with the bank exposure and capital shortfall and to address any unsustainable debt situation. The current prescription by the European policy makers to provide a short-term liquidity facility or medium-term stability funding is not working.  For example, the banking system does not receive the long-term funding or new capital injection required.  Instead, they get a guarantee from their own government, which has its’ own poor credit.  The risk in delay is the higher cost of the bailout and greater potential losses for bondholders.

 

For more on Alessandro Leipold’s thoughts on sovereign debt click on the link:

http://tinyurl.com/3dwg2tr

 

Note: During the week of May 9, 2011, Greek government debt Credit Default Swaps (effectively a form of debt “insurance”) reached record high prices.

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

Unquestioned Assumptions

By Stephen McPhie, CA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc.

www.RSDsolutions.com

info@RSDsolutions.com 

 

Does your company revisit assumptions upon which your approach to risk is based?  Are assumptions challenged?  Is there a dynamic process to do this?  Throughout most of my career, U.S. government obligations have been considered to be the definitive risk free debt.  No longer, now that S&P has placed it on negative outlook.  Willem Buiter, a former member of the Monetary Policy Committee and now chief economist at Citigroup, told the CFA Institute annual conference in Edinburgh[1]: “S&P’s negative outlook (on the US) is likely to be followed by a negative watch and then a downgrade early in 2013, unless a miracle happens …”.

 

Should this have been foreseen some time ago?  I would argue that this assumption about U.S. government debt should have been questioned several years ago.  In fact, perhaps it should never have been taken as an assumption. 

 

Nothing is risk free and no assumptions are valid beyond the moment they are made.  That is why a risk management system must be dynamic, and not imposed statically and left to apply until someone new comes in and decides to do an update, perhaps years later.



[1] As reported in the Herald www.heraldscotland.com/business/markets-economy/us-economy-may-face-debt-downgrade-1.1100695 


 

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

China’s energy needs = America’s sacrifice

by Michael Arbow, MBA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc.

www.RSDsolutions.com

info@RSDsolutions.com

 

Over the past two months the markets have witnessed rising oil prices and a quick snap correction.  The culprit cited for the rise is unrest in the Middle East (still unresolved) and for the fall a slowing of the US economy.  These are immediate term issues which will eventually fade in the wash of time and are only masking the continued upward movement of oil due to a world which if not at peak oil then is at least increasing reserves at a rate less than usage increases.  Surrounding this news is China, a growing economy that requires only a 1% increase in oil demand to wipe-out a 10% decrease in US use.  So how will China get the oil it needs to continue growing? 

 

The idea sported by Jeff Rubin (see link) suggest that the Chinese slow down on their uptake of US government debt.  By doing this the US government has two options either a) print money and thus debase the dollar and therefore raise the US dollar price for oil/gasoline or b) reduce the government debt which in itself will either cause the economy to slow and/or US consumers to be taxed more and thus less able to afford gasoline (already on average 9% of US disposable income up from 5% two years ago).

 

Either solution will result in a weaker US dollar relative to most currencies and an economy that can no longer afford some of imported luxuries.  The risk questions that arise from this scenario are numerous and can only be reduced by some positive US Black Swan event (?).  I believe the path has been decided it is only the knowledge of the timing that remains elusive.  In this volatile global village even smaller local firms can be take a “hit”.  How is your risk team looking at this eventuality?  Or is it still too far out there to consider? 

 

For more on Jeff Rubin’s views on this click on the Globe and Mail link:

http://tinyurl.com/3l9fkg6

Monday, May 9, 2011

RSD Solutions is now a Canadian National Stock Exchange recognized service provider

by Michael Arbow, MBA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc.

www.RSDsolutions.com

info@RSDsolutions.com

 

RSD Solutions is proud to announce that we are now a recognized service provider in risk management to companies listed or seeking listing on the CNSX. CNSX Markets Inc. is a Canadian company that operates two distinct markets: The Canadian National Stock Exchange; and Pure Trading, which provides a high-speed trading venue for stocks listed on other Canadian stock exchanges. CNSX competes for listings and trading by offering lower listing fees and innovative continuous disclosure features designed to minimize regulatory costs while improving the quality of information available to investors. With over 140 securities listed, CNSX is a full service exchange for issuers of various types of securities from all business sectors.  Listed securities include their recent record IPO, Brookfield New Horizon Income Fund, which successfully listed on the CNSX after having raised $130 million.

 

This is a significant event for RSD Solutions Inc. as it highlights our abilities to work alongside and advise Canadian publicly traded companies.  We at RSD are thankful to the CNSX for placing their trust in our expertise and we look forward to working with them and their clients in the future. 

 

To learn more about the CNSX, companies that are listed, or how to list, click on the link:

http://www.cnsx.ca/

 

To see the complete list of CNSX listed service providers click on the link:

http://tinyurl.com/3s5b7gk

Well that was fun,… for some: Canada’s election results

by Michael Arbow, MBA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc.

www.RSDsolutions.com

info@RSDsolutions.com

 

May 2nd was a rather busy day for the global news junkie but here in Canada, international events took a back seat to the Federal election.  What started as a snooze fest was anything but in the last two weeks of campaigning and provided political risk managers – spin doctors (?) with some valuable lessons.  The end result was the Conservative Party received a majority government after three tries, the number three (New Democratic Party) unexpectedly become the number two and the nation’s number two, the Liberals may be going the way of the 1935 British Liberal party.  A special mention should also go out to the Bloc Quebecois which enjoyed one generation of staying power and was wiped out – perhaps joining the Liberal party in the history books.

 

A week after the fact and the dust has settled, a clearer picture of where that leaves Canada’s people and organizations is beginning to emerge.  With a strong left wing opposition, expect the right wing Conservatives to move a little closer to the centre on some issues, but fundamental to the Conservatives is low corporate and personal taxes and continued support for the energy sector (read; oil sands) and possibly agriculture.  Also expect the Conservatives to push for a national securities regulator and be pretty hands-off on the financial and greater business community.  End result: the Canadian dollar will continue to strengthen against the US dollar and likely most OECD currencies.  Expectations for yearend are already $USD 1.09 (CAD .92/1.00 USD) and I can see Patricia Croft’s and David Rosenberg’s three year expectation of $1.20 still a possibility.

 

So the story of the loonie’s rise continues and if anything is now reinforced.  For Canadian exporters, the argument for delaying effective hedge strategies is continuing to get weaker.  The question then is:  what discussions does your risk department have prior to and after an election?  Canada has shown, the unexpected can happen and the results can be significant. 

 

For more on this story click on the link to the Globe and Mail article:

http://tinyurl.com/4xo2jct

 

Sunday, May 8, 2011

Ideas Portfolio

by Rick Nason, PhD, CFA

Partner, RSD Solutions Inc.

www.RSDsolutions.com

info@RSDsolutions.com 

 

I recently gave a talk at the Arditti Center for Risk Management at DePaul University in Chicago.  It was a joint event with PRMIA.  The audience for the talk was fantastic.  They were a truly eclectic crew, ranging from academics, to traders, to computer scientists, and perhaps even one or two people who got lost and decided to stick around for the cheese and crackers afterwards.

 

What made the audience so great is that (a) they were a very diverse bunch, and (b) they were very active in asking questions and making comments.  It was a delight for me and I know that I learned a lot and got a plethora of great ideas to work on.

 

One of the problems that I currently see in risk departments is that they do not have mechanisms to exchange ideas and to build an ideas portfolio.  Risk departments need to be active in actively seeking out new ideas – ideas that will challenge them and generate new paradigms.  Risk departments need to be as creative if not more creative than marketing and advertising departments.  Risk departments need to carefully build, evolve and nurture their ideas portfolios.