Recent Blog Posts
-
The Times' Rorshach Geithner Story
Apr 27 20099:04am EDT -
Sinking Animal Spirits
Apr 27 20098:04am EDT -
Counter-cyclical Urban Policy
Apr 26 200910:04am EDT -
Be Your Own Counterfeiter
Apr 26 20099:04am EDT -
Being Tim Geithner
Apr 25 200912:04pm EDT -
Notes From a Press Conference Naif
Apr 25 20099:04am EDT -
What Good is the News?
Apr 25 20098:04am EDT -
Stressful Enough
Apr 24 20092:04pm EDT -
Not Regretting the Pound
Apr 24 20091:04pm EDT -
Introducing the New Ford Squeeze
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
Non-Economic Questions of the Day
Apr 24 20099:04am EDT -
The Stress Test Blind Alley
Apr 24 20098:04am EDT -
Happy Hour
Apr 23 20099:04pm EDT -
Recovery Without Rebalancing
Apr 23 20096:04pm EDT -
The Shape of Your Recession
Apr 23 20095:04pm EDT
Links
- Felix Salmon

- DealBreaker

- Ryan Avent: The Bellows

- The Epicurean Dealmaker

- Chris Anderson

- Ultimi Barbarorum

- MarketBeat

- Michelle Leder

- John Quiggin

- The Panelist

- Andrew Leonard

- Streetsblog

- Brad Setser

- Michael Mandel

- Financial Crookery

- Kash Mansori

- Dean Baker

- Calculated Risk

- Free Exchange

- Curbed

- Lance Knobel

- Econospeak

- Carbon Tax Center

- Overcoming Bias

- Mark Thoma

- Naked Capitalism

- Alphaville

- Barry Ritholtz

- Alexander Campbell

- The Bayesian Heresy

- Brad DeLong

- DealBook

- Greg Mankiw

- Deal Journal

- FP Passport

- Carl Bialik

- Marginal Revolution

- A Fistful of Euros

- Dan Gross

How the CDS Market Can Support the Bond Market
I'm glad that Equity Private quoted herself yesterday, because I missed this the first time round:
Are we surprised when people point fingers at Bear and suggest, for instance, that they are buying up the underlying assets and loosening credit terms on the debtors to avoid a default, a mark to market problem and, to boot, to avoid paying, for instance, on credit default swaps- for which their liability is much greater than taking a complete loss on the debt itself would be?
She adds, in her latest post:
The key distinction that makes it wildly worth it to attempt such a thing if you are on the wrong side of a credit default swap is the fact that 10:1 to 100:1 leverage is often being applied such that the derivative liabilities floating above the assets may vastly outweigh the value of the underlying instruments. Pretty cheap to just stick your hand in the black box of "mark to market" and prevent a write-down that way, nay?
I have no idea how many firms have written, on a net basis and on a certain credit, more credit protection than there is debt outstanding. But clearly, insofar as there are such firms, it makes sense for them to take on full responsibility for that debt and ensure that all payments get made in full and on time.
What's more, if it makes sense for one firm to do this, it makes sense for a consortium of credit insurers to do it as well, if the consortium has a large contingent CDS liability. So long as the coupon payments get made, they get their insurance premiums; if there's ever an event of default, however, they stand to lose a lot of money. (Although, looking at what happened with Delphi, perhaps they'll lose much less than full par value.)
Could the existence of the CDS market therefore help to prop up the bond market, and minimize the number of defaults that occur? It's possible. Frankly I'm skeptical that there are many institutions with such enormous positions in CDS: I'd expect banks, for one, to be much more hedged than that. When Equity Private talks about people pointing fingers at Bear, I think she's talking about John Paulson, way back in June. Since then, I haven't heard any more talk along these lines, and I don't think the Paulson allegations went anywhere in the end. But still, it's an intriguing possibility.






