The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
I've no idea what proportion of the stock of distressed sovereign bonds that represents... any ballpark numbers around? So : the ECB claims to be buying up these junk bonds because the market is dysfunctional, i.e. is improperly pricing in the risk of defaults which ALL serious people know to be impossible (which is why they are booked without impairment, as "hold to maturity" zero-risk securities!)
So : the ECB claims to be buying up these junk bonds because the market is dysfunctional, i.e. is improperly pricing in the risk of defaults which ALL serious people know to be impossible (which is why they are booked without impairment, as "hold to maturity" zero-risk securities!)
therefore the price of these bonds would be MUCH lower, and the yields higher, if the ECB did not intervene,
I want to understand whether the ECB is buying these bonds directly from the banks, or whether speculators bought the bonds from the banks, then took fright and sold on to the ECB (in the aggregate) : i.e. are the speculators getting a haircut too?
How does default insurance correlate to bond ownership? Is it necessary to own bonds in order to purchase insurance? Are the speculators buying insurance when they buy bonds?
If the bulk of Greek debt is now no longer held by banks, but by speculators who hold insurance, then when the price drops, their interest is best served by default, right? Or by full payment at term without rollover, but unserious people like these speculators know that this is impossible.
I've probably got hold of the wrong end of a stick that may not even exist; but I'm trying to follow the money here. And you people are writing my book for me.
You're grasping at straws with your "follow the money".
Guilty as charged...
I'm still looking for a tangible villain. Given the mechanical inevitability of default for Greece (barring a deus-ex-machina from the ECB, which I think we can agree is not on the cards), the smart money is presumably gaming the ECB's stupidity for all it's worth.
The most obvious way of doing this is by buying CDS.
Therefore, anyone taking a major bet on Greek default, through a CDS position, may wish to influence outcomes by blocking off all alternatives to full payment (impossible) or default (jackpot).
Ratings agencies which declare "anything which is different from full payment (e.g. voluntary rollover) is equivalent to default" would seem to fit with such a strategy.
The head of a ratings agency who secretly held a massive CDS position might make a satisfying villain.
Just thinking out loud here. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
My head hurts. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
If you sell insurance with no intention of paying out, is that not fraudulent? Economics is politics by other means
This is all a matter of parasitical side-bets on the main events of Euro liquidity/solvency matters, but the stakes are high.
It could all get quite violent. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
Writing a crime novel is easy, comparatively speaking. But I would prefer that it were plausible and didactic in nature.
It's a variation on the old "insure and burn" scam. No, it's actually more like match-fixing : placing bets on outcomes, and reducing the uncertainties.
I would prefer if I could identify actors who stand to gain from the Euro crisis itself, rather than CDS side-bets, and who might therefore wish to influence outcomes. But I haven't identified anyone yet : it looks like a lose-lose-lose situation, a seriously negative-sum game. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
Götterdammerüng, and lots of humping among the ruins. It is rightly acknowledged that people of faith have no monopoly of virtue - Queen Elizabeth II
I would prefer if I could identify actors who stand to gain from the Euro crisis itself, rather than CDS side-bets, and who might therefore wish to influence outcomes. But I haven't identified anyone yet : it looks like a lose-lose-lose situation, a seriously negative-sum game.
In terms of money? Certainly.
In terms of goods and resources? Absolutely.
In terms of power? No. Power over others is a zero-sum game.
But of course this is a case where reality is unrealistic. It is hard to make a character in a book motivated by power over other people without having him become a caricature sociopath.
- Jake Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
If you sell insurance with no intention of paying out, is that not fraudulent?
That is the advantage for the buyer of having insurance regulated. But since this is not insurance, I guess pretending to insure would be the correct name of the service. Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
the whole point of CDS swaps was to enable you to treat risky junk as though they were AAA investments and relieve you of the obnoxious reserve requirements
Capitalism: CDS buyers pretend to buy insurance and CDS sellers pretend to sell it.
Hm, not as catchy. Sweden's finest (and perhaps only) collaborative, leftist e-newspaper Synapze.se
by Frank Schnittger - May 31
by Oui - May 30 15 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 23 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 27 3 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 5 22 comments
by Oui - May 13 66 comments
by Carrie - Apr 30 7 comments
by Oui - Jun 17 comments
by Oui - May 3125 comments
by Oui - May 3015 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 273 comments
by Oui - May 2726 comments
by Oui - May 24
by Frank Schnittger - May 233 comments
by Oui - May 1366 comments
by Oui - May 910 comments
by Frank Schnittger - May 522 comments
by Oui - May 450 comments
by Oui - May 312 comments
by Oui - Apr 30273 comments
by Carrie - Apr 307 comments
by Oui - Apr 2644 comments
by Oui - Apr 889 comments
by Oui - Mar 19144 comments