Log In

View Full Version : Analysts Say More Banks Will Fail



Zeno Swijtink
07-13-2008, 09:47 PM
https://www.affordablehousinginstitute.org/blogs/us/Bank_collapse_1930_small.jpg https://cache.daylife.com/imageserve/0emT5PLbUja0H/610x.jpg


Analysts Say More Banks Will Fail (https://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/14/business/14bank.html)
LOUISE STORY - The New York Times


As home prices continue to decline and loan defaults mount, federal regulators are bracing for dozens of American banks to fail over the next year.

But after a large mortgage lender in California collapsed late Friday, Wall Street analysts began posing two crucial questions: Just how many banks might falter? And, more urgently, which one could be next?

The nation's banks are in far less danger than they were in the late 1980s and early 1990s, when more than 1,000 federally insured institutions went under during the savings-and-loan crisis. The debacle, the greatest collapse of American financial institutions since the Depression, prompted a government bailout that cost taxpayers about $125 billion.

But the troubles are growing so rapidly at some small and midsize banks that as many as 150 out of the 7,500 banks nationwide could fail over the next 12 to 18 months, analysts say. Other lenders are likely to shut branches or seek mergers.

'Everybody is drawing up lists, trying to figure out who the next bank is, No. 1, and No. 2, how many of them are there,' said Richard X. Bove, the banking analyst with Ladenburg Thalmann, who released a list of troubled banks over the weekend. 'And No. 3, from the standpoint of Washington, how badly is it going to affect the economy?'

Many investors are on edge after federal regulators seized the California lender, IndyMac Bank, one of the nation's largest savings and loans, last week. With $32 billion in assets, IndyMac, a spinoff of the Countrywide Financial Corporation, was the biggest American lender to fail in more than two decades.

Now, as the Bush administration grapples with the crisis at the nation䴜s two largest mortgage finance companies, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, a rush of earnings reports in the coming days and weeks from some of the nation䴜s largest financial companies are likely to provide more gloomy reminders about the sorry state of the industry.

The future of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is vital to the banks, savings and loans and credit unions, which own $1.3 trillion of securities issued or guaranteed by the two mortgage companies. If the mortgage giants ever defaulted on those obligations, banks might be forced to raise billions of dollars in additional capital.

The large institutions set to report results this week, including Citigroup and Merrill Lynch, are in no danger of failing, but some are expected to report more multibillion-dollar write-offs.

But time may be running out for some small and midsize lenders. They vary in size and location, but their common woe is the collapsed real estate market and souring mortgage loans. Most of these banks are far smaller than the industry giants that have drawn so much scrutiny from regulators and investors.

Still, only six lenders have failed so far this year, including IndyMac. In 1994, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation listed 575 banks that it considered to be troubled. As of this spring, the agency was worried about just 90 banks. That number may go up in August, when the government releases an updated list.

'Failed banks are a lagging indicator, not a leading indicator,' said William Isaac, who was chairman of the F.D.I.C. in the early 1980s and is now the chairman of the Secura Group, a finance consulting firm in Virginia. 'So you will see more troubled, more failed banks this year.'

And yet IndyMac, one of the nation's largest mortgage lenders, was not on the government's troubled bank list this spring - an indication that other troubled banks may be below the radar.

The F.D.I.C. has $53 billion set aside to reimburse consumers for deposits lost at failed banks. IndyMac will eat up $4 billion to $8 billion of that fund, the agency estimates, and that could force it to raise more money from the banks that it insures.

The agency does not disclose which banks it thinks are troubled. But analysts are circulating their own lists, and short sellers - investors who bet against stocks - are piling on. In recent weeks, the share prices of some regional banks, like the BankUnited Financial Corporation, in Florida, and the Downey Financial Corporation, in California, have stumbled hard amid concern about their financial health. A BankUnited spokeswoman said the lender had largely avoided risky subprime loans.

In his 'Who Is Next?' report over the weekend, Mr. Bove listed the fraction of loans at banks that are nonperforming, meaning, for example, that the assets have been foreclosed on or that payments are 90 days past due. He came up with what he called a danger zone, which was a percentage above 5 percent. Seven banks fell in this category.

An important issue for the regional and community banks will be whether they have managed to sell their riskiest loans to Wall Street firms.

And the government may have fewer failures than in the past because private investment funds might buy some troubled lenders. Regulators are considering rule changes that would allow private equity firms to buy larger shares of banks, and several prominent investors, like Wilbur Ross, have raised funds to leap in.

Lenny
07-14-2008, 04:40 PM
One could really learn to hate the NY Times.
Most folks do not read much past the first couple of paragraphs and this story is typical in spreading fear and apprehension in a market that thrives off of it.
The fact that the 1980s S&L debacle was paid off in about 12 years doesn't bother Ms Story's article. Those folks have no civic pride to write in a manner that would not inflame the public's misgivings of the economy. No, they just want to make that almighty dollar. Ah, the love of money!

MsTerry
07-14-2008, 06:03 PM
<big class="pr">AP</big>
Fannie-Freddie lifeline puts taxpayers on the hook
Monday July 14, 7:17 pm ET
By Martin Crutsinger and Alan Zibel, AP Business Writers <table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" height="4"><tbody><tr><td height="4">
</td></tr></tbody></table>As government steps in to help Fannie and Freddie, will other institutions be too big to fail?
WASHINGTON (AP) -- Now that the federal government has thrown a lifeline to mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, taxpayers could be on the hook for billions more if the crisis of confidence spreads.<table align="left" border="0" cellpadding="4" cellspacing="4"><tbody><tr><td><table class="ad_slug_table" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr><td align="center">
</td></tr></tbody></table><script language="javascript"> if(window.yzq_d==null)window.yzq_d=new Object(); window.yzq_d['AboBBELaX9w-']='&U=13fgbb2v3%2fN%3dAboBBELaX9w-%2fC%3d674272.12804653.13083581.1435155%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d5405003%2fV%3d1'; </script><noscript>https://us.bc.yahoo.com/b?P=tBfoNdFJqz.W4C7GR8eDiQBTQ6R7t0h79q0AAoY7&T=1f7l3bjmp%2fX%3d1216083629%2fE%3d8988914%2fR%3dfin%2fK%3d5%2fV%3d2.1%2fW%3dH%2fY%3dYAHOO%2fF%3d2264746941%2fH%3dY29udGVudD0iZWNvbm9teTtwb2xpdGljczt0 YXhlcyIgY29icmFuZD0iPGEgaHJlZj1odHRwOi8vdXMucmQueWFob28uY29tL2ZpbmFuY2UvbmV3cy9hcGYvU0lHPTEwa2Ztb2ZvbC8qaHR0cDovL3d3dy5hcC5vcmcvPjxpbWcgYm9yZGVyPTAgc3 JjPWh0dHA6Ly91cy5pMS55aW1nLmNvbS91cy55aW1nLmNvbS9pL3VzL2ZpL2dyL3BhcnRuZXJfbG9nb3MvYXAyXzE3MHgzMy5naWYgYWx0PUFQPjwvYT4iIGNhY2hlaGludD0iODk4ODkxNCIgY2Fj aGVoaW50PSI4OTg4OTE0Ig--%2fQ%3d-1%2fS%3d1%2fJ%3dFDAA49D1&U=13fgbb2v3%2fN%3dAboBBELaX9w-%2fC%3d674272.12804653.13083581.1435155%2fD%3dLREC%2fB%3d5405003%2fV%3d1</noscript></td></tr></tbody></table>There were encouraging signs Monday for the rescue plan, but also signs of concern -- notably on Wall Street, where shares of the two companies slumped further -- that the plan won't be enough.
Other banks are already teetering: National City Corp. shares fell nearly 15 percent on rumors of financial trouble, even though it said it was experiencing no unusual depositor or creditor activity. And Washington Mutual Inc.'s shares fell 35 percent, to a paltry $3.23 amid worries about whether it had enough cash to handle the mortgage market downturn. WaMu said that it did.
And worried customers lined up Monday to pull cash out of their accounts at IndyMac Bank, seized on Friday by the federal government.
Some critics said they fear the Fannie-Freddie rescue effort will make more bailouts inevitable by sending a message that some institutions are too big to fail and thus encouraging risky behavior.
"It sends the wrong message to the world," said Joshua Rosner, managing director of research firm Graham, Fisher & Co. in New York.
Sung Won Sohn, an economics professor at The Smith School of Business at Cal State Channel Islands, cited soaring oil costs, a weakening economy and an unstable housing market that he said will only get worse.
"I don't think these steps are enough to arrest the deterioration," he said.
As long as more homeowners default on mortgages, losses to financial institutions will mount. Those losses already exceed $400 billion, and some analysts believe they will top $1 trillion before the housing carnage is over.
By comparison, Congress has authorized $650 billion so far to fight the Iraq war.
The Bush administration and the Federal Reserve announced an emergency rescue plan Sunday to bolster Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which hold or guarantee more than $5 trillion in mortgages -- almost half of the nation's total.
The plan would temporarily increase a long-standing Treasury line of credit that could be provided to either company. Treasury also said it would, if necessary, buy stock in the companies to make sure they have enough money to operate.
The Fed also announced it would allow Fannie and Freddie to get loans directly from the Fed -- a privilege previously granted only to commercial banks until this March, when the Fed extended the borrowing to investment banks to deal with the collapse of Bear Stearns.
House Financial Services Chairman Barney Frank, D-Mass., predicted Congress would grant approval for the extended line of credit as part of a broader housing measure that he believes President Bush could sign by the end of next week.
In a letter to Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke and Timothy Geithner, the president of the Fed's New York regional bank, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said Monday that he saw any Fed loans as an interim step designed to serve as a bridge to legislation. He added the administration is pursuing legislation "urgently" with Congress to increase Treasury's lending authority to the two institutions.
Monday began with a good sign for Freddie Mac: It attracted more bidders than it had all year for one of its regular debt auctions which raised $3 billion in short-term securities.
Fannie and Freddie stock rose early in the day but gave up the gains. Fannie closed down about 5 percent, at $9.73, and Freddie closed down about 8 percent, at $7.11.
Meanwhile, hundreds of worried customers lined up Monday to pull their money out of IndyMac bank, seized by the government Friday in the second biggest bank failure in U.S. history.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. estimated the IndyMac failure, the largest since the collapse of Continental Illinois in 1984, would cost between $4 billion and $8 billion out of the agency's $53 billion insurance fund.
Analysts do not expect the volume of bank failures that happened from 1990 to 1992, when 834 of them folded. But the FDIC does plan to review whether to raise the fees it charges banks to beef up its insurance fund.
Brian Bethune, chief U.S. financial economist at Global Insight, called the troubles at Fannie and Freddie a "potentially dangerous turn of events" for the U.S. economy.
He said they needed to be addressed quickly with an infusion from the government -- read "taxpayers" -- of as much as $20 billion in new capital for both institutions.
Right now, the Treasury can extend up to $2.25 billion in loans each to Fannie and Freddie. Officials refused to discuss what the new limit might be but dismissed one report of a $300 billion limit as too high.
Treasury officials also said directly buying Fannie and Freddie stock would be a last resort.
Substantial sums are involved in any event. Analysts say the economic risks of doing nothing are just too great.
"If the government hadn't moved and Fannie and Freddie failed, the cost to taxpayers and the overall economy would be enormous," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com.
In Fannie and Freddie were unable to play their huge roles in financing new mortgages, the housing market would only suffer more, he said -- not to mention the turmoil for the financial institutions around the world that invest in Fannie and Freddie's debt securities.
Critics have warned for years that Fannie and Freddie had grown too large, with not enough of a financial cushion.
"They have been allowed to grow out of control to the point where they must be backed by the U.S. government," said Peter Wallison, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and a longtime critic. "We have just ... allowed ourselves to become hostage to these two institutions."
Fannie and Freddie's financial reports remain difficult to understand, even after accounting scandals that came to light five years ago forced the companies to restate several years of earnings and oust top executives.
Wall Street analysts were spooked in May when one measurement of Freddie Mac's total assets fell to negative $5.2 billion at the end of the first quarter, a huge swing from positive $12.6 billion at the end of last year.
The company downplayed the figure, saying it reflected a frozen market for mortgage investments, and said those assets would eventually rebound in value.
The next few weeks -- in which Fannie and Freddie post their second-quarter results and may attempt to raise a bigger capital cushion -- are key, Zandi said. He said in the best possible outcome is if the rescue plan helps the two companies stabilize their finances on their own without any loss of government loans.
"At the end of the day, with a little bit of luck, it won't cost taxpayers a dime," Zandi said.



One could really learn to hate the NY Times.
Most folks do not read much past the first couple of paragraphs and this story is typical in spreading fear and apprehension in a market that thrives off of it.
The fact that the 1980s S&L debacle was paid off in about 12 years doesn't bother Ms Story's article. Those folks have no civic pride to write in a manner that would not inflame the public's misgivings of the economy. No, they just want to make that almighty dollar. Ah, the love of money!

Lenny
07-15-2008, 06:02 AM
Good point, Ms T. There's no shortage of DOOM in The Dismal Science. But of course the article mentions an expert from the excellent American Institute for Economic Research, a think tank that wants gold to be our basis for the dollar. Not a bad idea but if instituted there would be panic and blood the likes of which has not been seen since The Bastille Day (Happy July 14th). That source is the thinks Von Mises approach is too Kensyian for market!
But of course all the Chinese have to do is release into the world market the paper they bought from US and things will really shoot straight down!