From Bloomberg:
Six central banks led by the Federal
Reserve made it cheaper for banks to borrow dollars in
emergencies in a global effort to ease Europe’s sovereign-debt
crisis.
Stocks rallied worldwide, commodities surged and yields on
most European debt fell on the show of force from central banks
aimed at easing strains in financial markets. The cost for
European banks to borrow dollars dropped from the highest in
three years, tempering concerns about the euro’s worsening crisis
after leaders said they’d failed to boost the region’s bailout
fund as much as planned.
“It’s supportive but not necessarily a game changer,”
said Michelle Girard, senior U.S. economist at RBS Securities
Inc. in Stamford, Connecticut. “The impact is more
psychological than anything else” as investors take heart from
policy makers’ coordination, Girard said.
The premium banks pay to borrow dollars overnight from
central banks will fall by half a percentage point to 50 basis
points, the Fed said today in a statement in Washington. The so-
called dollar swap lines will be extended by six months to Feb.
1, 2013. The Fed coordinated the move with the European Central
Bank and the central banks of Canada, Switzerland, Japan and the
U.K.
Why did this happen?
On Tuesday evening, Standard & Poor's downgraded the long-term debt ratings of some of the largest banks in the world.
By Wednesday morning, the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank
and central banks from
Canada, England, Japan and Switzerland announced
coordinated action to support liquidity in financial markets that
mirrors the 2008 financial crisis.
Mere coincidence? Likely not.
Once banks saw their ratings downgraded, it raised the specter that
they would have to post billions in additional collateral on trades just
as market pressures make it hard for them to replace the funds through a
stock or bond offering.
There was a rumor that a European bank had nearly failed --
which is said to be untrue.
The Interwebs are all aflame with a rumor that a European bank was
about to go kaput last night, which is what inspired central banks to
turn up the liquidity spigots today.
Trouble is, there’s not an ounce of evidence this is true.
The rumor is based on a blog post written at Forbes by a nuclear
physicist/hedge-fund manager that is pure speculation on his part: The
only reason central banks would do this, he says, is if a bank was on
the verge of failure.
Regardless of the rumor mill, the impetus for this coordinated move -- whatever it was -- can't be good; central banks don't increase liquidity in a massive move unless there is something wrong somewhere. Period.
2 comments:
The reason in one chart:
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/quote?ticker=.TEDSP:IND
The TED Spread had been below 50 basis points since July of 2009 but has been steadily climbing since the summer of this year.
There may be some less publicly available reasons for this move and some banks might be struggling. Increasing liquidity for these banks should help reduce the risk of credit seizing up.
On a related note, I've been wondering how the huge piles of cash that corporations have stock piled could affect another credit freeze. The big problem last time, as I recall was that even major corporations couldn't borrow money to meet short term obligations (salary payments, etc). But if they've got piles of cash this would seemingly be less problematic for them. They'd just use their reserves.
While that's not a long term solution to a credit freeze, it could help make the markets a little less panicky about that kind fo situation.
"...the impetus for this coordinated move -- whatever it was -- can't be good; central banks don't increase liquidity in a massive move unless there is something wrong somewhere. Period."
Very interesting. While the bolgosphere is filled with millions of words about this bank action, you "Cut to the chase." For sure, I'll stay tuned to your follow ups.
Best
Tom
Post a Comment