Izvlečki vikend branja nedavnih člankov 2.

Wall Street Journal o teoriji panike kot vzroka za krizo oziroma logiki, da problem ni bil v sami veri na/o finančnih trgih ampak v tistih vernikih, ki so prvi nehali verovati. :-)

Deutsche Bank and the Unintended Consequence
How Dodd-Frank and other steps to redress the 2008 crisis are helping to foment the next panic.
A long acknowledged expert, Mr. Scott dispenses with the idea that the crisis flowed as the necessary result of a housing correction or bad mortgages, or because Lehman Brothers (which held such mortgages) was too connected to other banks such that they would fail if Lehman could not honor its debts.
The problem wasn’t connectedness, but contagion, more colloquially known as panic. Example: The Reserve Fund, a money-market fund, “broke the buck” because it held a small amount of Lehman IOUs. Yet the run quickly spread to other money-market funds that held no Lehman IOUs, only stopping when the money-fund industry was enfolded in a general government bailout of the financial system.
www.wsj.com/articles...1475275153

Financial Times ima ob postkriznem finančnem kobacanju veliko bolj tehtno poanto.

Deutsche Bank’s fine poses another form of moral hazard
Absence of executives from DoJ charge sheet is a real eye-opener
No one questions that shareholders should have responsibility for the conduct of an enterprise — especially one with the economic significance of a big financial institution. Those who both have rights of control and a share in the fruits should bear the costs when things go awry. But it is striking how through the post-crisis period almost all penalties have fallen on the investors, and indeed continue to do so. Just look at the furore about the proposed settlement between the DoJ and Deutsche Bank. Most bank fines have ranged from the annoying to the painful. In this case, the DoJ went further: the $14bn it was apparently demanding — a startling four-fifths of Deutsche’s market capitalisation — actually raised questions about the bank’s ability to pay.
Even so, the real eye-opener was not so much the number (which is anyway likely to be negotiated and much smaller) as the absence of any bank executives from the charge sheet. One might have thought that malfeasance requiring such a level of restitution would at least have resulted in staff being pursued because of what they had done.
...
The authorities claim that no bank is “too big to jail”. Their continuing reliance solely on escalating fines and settlements says otherwise. The gap between words and deeds is not only proving very costly for shareholders, as Deutsche’s investors are just the latest to discover. It gives the impression that bank capital can be seized as a form of tax, and that executives can buy their way out of their responsibilities to the law or to investors and customers. Nothing is more damaging to a recovery of public trust in banks.
www.ft.com/content/f...ada1d123b1

Poudarjeno seveda velja tudi za DežeLOVEnijo, v kateri sta BS in vlada RS pod vodstvom nekdanje nadzornice NKBM v Nacht und Nebel Aktion to isto in druge banke razglasila za mrhovino, lastnike in upnike razlastila ter vse skupaj zalila z davkoplačevalskimi milijardami. Člani uprav, nadzornih svetov, revizorskih hiš teh bank in odgovorni uslužbenci ustanove za nadzor bančnega sistema so bili doslej deležni nekaj zaslišanj in preiskav, medijskega ropota in občasne podpore iz visokih mednarodnih institucij.*
Kjer ni grešnika, tudi greha ni!

*www.imf.org/en/News/...vid-Lipton

Izvlečki vikend branja nedavnih člankov 3.

Financial Times o preverjanju obračunavanja stroškov za dolgoročne naložbe v sklade

EU to investigate fees and performance of funds
European regulators will look at the transparency of long-term retail products
www.ft.com/content/a...4dcea95797

Na to temo iz bruseljskih dvoran EK:

VP Dombrovskis: The CMU Action Plan - One Year On
...
The Capital Markets Union should also provide more options for people who want to save for their retirement. The EU has no single market for personal pensions. We are missing out on economies of scale which limits choice and pushes up the cost for savers. It also means many Europeans do not have access to what can be a valuable addition to a state based or occupational pension.
Over the past 50 years, returns on equity indices yielded 6% annual return and return on corporate debt averaged 4.9%. Banks delivered 1.5% on deposits. The higher levels of return delivered by capital markets could make a critical difference to people saving over the long term, as long as fees are reasonable. As a first step, we have launched a public consultation. We want to use it to determine how to create a competitive and simple personal pension product. We will look carefully at the responses we received and set out how we move forward in this area. We are keeping all options open – including proposing new legislation.
...
We will also ask the ESAs to look at the transparency of long term retail investment and pension products, and to perform an analysis of their actual net performance and fees. Returns on retail investment products and pensions can be heavily influenced by the fees levied by asset managers and intermediaries. The right data on the net performance and fees of the most commonly sold products is important. We need it to ensure more competition and better service for consumers.
ec.europa.eu/commiss...ne-year_en

Krasna karikatura FT o inovativnem penzijskem skladu :-)

next-geebee.ft.com/i...&width=600