5. The 2/22/09 London Sunday Times provides a description of what it was like in the trenches, by a risk manager for a major financial company. He describes mania at full throttle:
“I once tried to block a large derivative deal because the maths (a British term) didn’t make sense. It wasn’t going to make enough profit to justify the 30 years of credit risk it was going to leave on the balance sheet. But the head salesman, who was behind the trade, would be paid his bonus in one year, not 30. Needless to say, he disagreed with my analysis.
My boss and I tried to face him down. He went straight for the jugular and threatened to take the matter to the head of Fixed Income, accusing us of curtailing good client business and short-changing the shareholders. I tried to make my case but my boss’s appreciation of derivatives was weak, to say the least. I could see he had lost my point in the first sentence of my argument….
Many senior managers have been as clueless as the outside world as how to value these (derivatives) trades. They are simply sitting at the top of the pile, praying they have timed it well to enjoy a couple of good years and allow themselves the opportunity to cream off the mother of all bonuses.
Job protection is a career in itself. All these complex products are designed and controlled by complicated computer programs. It has been known for the analysts who build the valuation systems to add pages and pages of unnecessary computer code so as to conceal what is really happening.
The managers are unable to check their work….”
We do not know if this manager
worked for RBS, the Royal Bank of Scotland. The 2/24/09 WSJ reports that RBS
would like to government insure £325 billion in toxic assets. Compare
this with RBS’ average 2007 shareholder equity of £43 billion, levered at 27:1. We
suspect this problem is fairly typical.
Level 3 Assets are assets held on the books of financial institutions priced using unobservable inputs and management judgment. They are probably to be viewed with some skepticism.
6. Niebuhr, Reinhold; The Essential Reinhold Niebuhr (ed.); Yale University Press (New Haven, 1986); p. 172.
According to David Frum, on the 3/15/09 Meet the Press, the economic news during the George W. Bush administration was not good. The only good news was the increase in house prices, and “no one wanted to get in the way of the story.” Mr. Frum was the former president’s speechwriter. Major events are often caused by perfect storms, at the intersection of several historic factors that this essay discusses.
The problem with all the value at risk statistical models (even assuming the statistical models to be valid) was that they were calibrated in the “Golden Decade” of 1997-2007, and the risk analyses were “precisely calibrated in-sample.” Thus, a comparison of the statistics of that decade with the long-run data of English GDP since 1857 (they do have an historical perspective) reveals that the period of moderation was most atypical:
Distribution of UK GDP
Time Series
Golden Decade Long-run Mean
2.9 2.0 Standard Deviation .6 2.7 (note
especially) Skew *
0.2 -0.8 Kurtosis *
-0.8 -2.2