Friday, August 23, 2013

Founder of firm that mis-sold insurance to SEVEN MILLION customers gives his crude assessment of £1.3BILLION compensation order

The founder of the controversial company at the centre of the banks' latest mis-selling scandal today blasted the deal to return £1.3billion in compensation to duped customers.
Around 7.5million people who were persuaded to buy useless insurance against identity theft for their credit cards will share in the payout, regulators said today. 
13 of the biggest banks and building societies referred customers applying for cards to CPP, which sold ‘card protection’ and ‘identity protection’ policies, either directly or through the banking giants.
Today the firm's largest shareholder, Hamish Ogston, described the size of the compensation pot as 'b******s' and a 'ridiculous figure'.
He predicted that not all eligible consumers would claim for a refund, saying: 'There's never been a compensation redress scheme in history where it's been 100 per cent.'
Mr Ogston, who owns 57 per cent of CPP but stood down from the board in June, accused the regulator FCA of 'sensationalism, by quoting a huge 100 per cent rate'.
Fraud: Many customers didn't realise that they didn't need credit card insurance against fraudulent transactions because they are not liable for unauthorised payments which are usually automatically refunded by the bank
Fraud: 13 banks have agreed to pay out billions to customers who were wrongly sold credit card insurance
The policies cost up to £84 a year but were utterly meaningless. Customers do not need insurance for fraudulent transactions on lost or stolen credit or debit cards because they are not liable for unauthorised card payments, which are automatically refunded by their bank.
For example, a bank would send a new credit card to a customer, with a sticker on the letter asking them to telephone a number to activate the card.
When the customer called the number, they were put through to CPP, which activated the card but also took the opportunity to sell the useless insurance policies.
 
'Customers were given misleading and unclear information about the policies so that they bought cover that either was not needed, or to cover risks that had been greatly exaggerated,' the Financial Conduct Authority said in a statement this morning.
'As well as CPP selling directly to customers, High Street banks and credit card issuers introduced millions of customers to CPP.'
The banks involved in the settlement are Bank of Scotland, Barclays, Canada Square Operations (formerly Egg), Capital One, Clydesdale, Home Retail Group Insurance Services, HSBC, MBNA, Morgan Stanley, Nationwide, Santander, the Royal Bank of Scotland and Tesco Personal Finance.
Honour: Mr Ogston is pictured being invested with the CBE by Princess Anne in 2011
Honour: Mr Ogston is pictured being invested with the CBE by Princess Anne in 2011

FIRM'S FOUNDER WHO TOOK £120M PAYDAY BEFORE THE SCANDAL

Hamish Ogston founded Card Protection Plan in London in 1980 in order to provide insurance to credit card users who were concerned about the risk of fraud.
He developed his entrepreneurial streak when he joined the Norwegian Merchant Navy aged 17 and sailed around the world, working on building sites and uranium mines in Canada.
After attending Manchester University, where he made a name for himself by dealing in cocoa futures, he decided to start his own business rather than look for a job so he could avoid sky-high income tax rates levied by the Labour government.
Although CPP took nearly a decade to turn a profit, it became enormously successful after he teamed up with more than a dozen banks to offer its services to all their cardholders - many of whom did not know what they were signing up for.
In an interview in 2000, Mr Ogston described the firm as ‘my best investment’ - and 10 years later, CPP, now based in York, netted him £120million when it floated on the stock market.
In 2011, he was awarded the CBE for services to business, receiving the honour from the Princess Royal in a ceremony at Buckingham Palace.
He retained a 57 per cent stake in CPP, but the firm’s fortunes turned sour last year when the FSA imposed a fine for the widespread mis-selling of card protection.
Mr Ogston, a father of three in his mid 60s, launched a bid to buy the company, but after he offered just £1.7million the offer was turned down, and he resigned from the board.
Between January 2005 and March 2011, the former City regulator, the Financial Services Authority, said last November it found ‘widespread mis-selling’ by CPP.
CPP was fined £10.5million last year by the FSA which lambasted its ‘overly persistent’ salesmen.
They aggressively sold the insurance to customers who ‘made clear that they did not wish to buy’, and were given sales targets for ‘successfully dissuading’ customers who tried to cancel their policies.
The biggest controversy surrounds the card protection policies, which cost an average of £35 a year from CPP.
It boasted that customers would benefit from up to £100,000 of insurance cover, which turned out to be useless.
Customers who thought they would be covered for up to £60,000 in losses suffered through identity theft discovered it covered only legal or administration expenses, not the fraudulent debts.
Card protection was 'widely mis-sold' by CPP, which 'greatly exaggerated' the risks of identity theft, according to the watchdog.
It is understood victims will receive a letter including details of how the money will be paid if they are eligible for compensation, which is likely to equal an average of £160 each.
If customers are due compensation, they will be entitled to the amount paid for their policy since January 14 2005, plus eight per cent interest on any sum owed.
The mis-selling scandal ran between 2005 and 2011, during which time CPP sold 4.4million policies and renewed almost 19million.
Of the 4.4 million policies, it is believed only around 300,000 were sold directly by CPP, while lenders were responsible for around 4.1million.
Widespread: As many as 14 banks are said to have been involved in the insurance scam
Widespread: As many as 14 banks are said to have been involved in the insurance scam
Controversy: The scandal centres around banks' links with the finance company CPP
Controversy: The scandal centres around banks' links with the finance company CPP
CPP's fine nearly sank the York-based insurance seller last year, with its shares tumbling by 98 per cent to less than just 2.5p, while its workforce has shrunk from 1,500 to 1,100.
However, Mr Ogston escaped unscathed from the disaster, as he had already banked £120million from the firm's stock market flotation in 2010.
Earlier this year the entrepreneur, who still owns a majority of CPP, quit the company's board and withdrew from discussions over how to secure its financial future.

HOW TO CLAIM: ADVICE FOR THOSE AFFECTED BY THE INSURANCE DEAL

Who is eligible for a share of the payout fund?
Anyone who purchased identify theft protection for their credit card between 2005 and 2011 is owed a refund as well as compensation.
How much could I receive in compensation?
The size of each customer's settlement will amount to the total they have paid for the insurance since January 14 2005, plus interest at the rate of eight per cent a year. Early estimates suggested that the typical payout would be around £160.
Can I claim even if I was not a customer of CPP?
Many consumers seem to have dealt with CPP, the firm at the centre of the scandal, without being aware they were doing so, as helpline numbers given out by High Street banks sometimes went straight through to the insurance firm. If you are unsure who provided your insurance, contact your bank.
Do I need to contact my bank to claim?
Unlike the PPI settlement, CPP and the banks have agreed to contact affected customers themselves, so if you are eligible you should hear about it over the next few months. The banks will also advertise in the media to raise awareness of the settlement.
Which banks are involved?
Bank of Scotland, Barclays, Canada Square Operations (formerly Egg), Capital One, Clydesdale, Home Retail Group Insurance Services, HSBC, MBNA, Morgan Stanley, Nationwide, Santander, the Royal Bank of Scotland and Tesco Personal Finance.
How will the claim process work?
Consumers will be invited to vote on the deal, and then when details are confirmed they will have to fill out a form registering their claim formally.
When will the compensation money start coming through?
After banks have contacted those affected, customers will vote on the details of the proposed deal. Once the deal is approved by a three-quarters majority, the financial institutions will start paying out, which could be as early next spring.
Is there a potential downside?
There may be - all customers who claim compensation will have their policies automatically cancelled, even if their claim is rejected. You should consider whether you derive any benefit from the protection before filing a formal claim.
In addition to the regulatory fine, the company is said to face a bill of more than £50million for compensating ripped-off customers directly.
Shares in CPP, which was recently handed a £36million funding lifeline by its banks, plunged more than 20 per cent today as investors balked at the cost of the scheme.
It is the latest in a series of banking scandals, most notably the £12billion mis-selling of payment protection insurance.
When a person took out a credit card or personal loan, they bought PPI to pay out if they lost their job, or had to stop working due to poor health.
But banks were selling the policies to people who did not need them, did not want them or, in many cases, did not know they were even buying it 
Unlike the PPI compensation deal which involves customers contacting lenders, CPP will get in touch with customers, starting from the end of the month.
Banks, credit card firms and CPP will also advertise in newspapers to ensure people hear about the compensation.
The FCA said customers will not need to use claims management companies to receive compensation.
Customers will need to vote on the redress programme - called a scheme of arrangement - before it can begin paying out in the spring.
It needs the backing of a majority of customers, as well as 75 per cent of voting customers.
The FCA said its main concern has been to 'ensure customers get a fair deal', adding that the scheme has been set up in a 'simple and standardised' way to recompense people.
The watchdog said its £1.3billion estimate is based on valid claims from all the customers who were sold or renewed their policies, but added that actual compensation will depend on the number of valid claims received.
Customers who do make a claim will have their policy cancelled, even if their claim is rejected.
The Financial Ombudsman Service said it received 247 new complaints about card protection insurance between April and June and is currently finding in favour of consumers in three quarters of cases.
A spokesman said: 'While card protection insurance can be useful for some people, in many of the cases we see the consumer neither wanted nor required the cover.
'There are a number of provisions in place that provide you with some protection if your identity is stolen - so don't feel pressured into taking out an insurance policy on the spur of the moment.'
Barclays' managing director for customer service Paul Maddox said: 'Some sales practices regarding past identity fraud and card protection policies were below acceptable standards, and were not in the interests of our customers'.
He added: 'We are determined to put things right for Barclays customers who are eligible for redress payments as swiftly as possible through this new scheme.'
RBS said: 'We are working collectively with CPP and those involved in the scheme to achieve the best outcome for those customers affected.'
Justin Modray, founder of consumer finance website CandidMoney.com, said recently it is ‘thoroughly depressing’ to see another case of banks’ ripping off their customers.
He added: ‘By asking loyal customers to pay for policies that were essentially worthless, it is no wonder levels of trust in the high-street banks is at absolute rock bottom.’
For information on how to claim, please click here

'MY BANK LIED TO ME': LOYAL CUSTOMER'S FURY OVER £300 CPP BILL

HSBC: One of the 13 banks which have signed up to the CPP compensation deal
HSBC: One of the 13 banks which have signed up to the CPP compensation deal
Geoff Purdy was shocked to discover that HSBC, where he had been a customer for years, had signed him up to card protection that was completely pointless.
He first got his debit card in 1991, and when it came time to renew the card the bank told him to ring a helpline to activate it.
After he phoned the number given, the first thing he was asked was whether he wanted to take out insurance against the risk of fraud or loss, at a cost of £74 for three years.
Mr Purdy, 64, agreed - not suspecting that the protection was legally useless, and not knowing that it would be automatically renewed for the next 12 years - adding up to a total bill of nearly £300.
The retired company director, from Lichfield in Staffordshire, closed his account last year, but after reading in the Mail that CPP was under investigation for mis-selling insurance he realised that he had been wrongly signed up for the payments.
Today he told MailOnline of his anger at being duped by his bank, saying: 'When you ring your bank to activate your card, you don't expect them to lie to you.
'The relationship has gone from you being a customer to being a source of revenue.'
He contacted both CPP and HSBC - one of 13 banks embroiled in the scandal - to ask for his money back, but they said that as he had voluntarily signed up for protection he was liable for the cost.
'They just told me it was my fault and they couldn't help me,' he said. 'Their attitude is just "deny, deny, deny" and hope that it goes away.'
Last month, he took his case to the Financial Ombudsman - but today's judgement should provide a ray of light, allowing him to reclaim the money with interest.
However Mr Purdy, a father of two and grandfather of four, is pessimistic about his chances of success, and predicts that the banks will go to any lengths to avoid paying compensation.
'They will only pay it out under extreme pressure,' he said. 'They'll push you towards the Ombudsman, and that's another delaying tactic.'
A spokesman for HSBC said: 'In line with CPPs Scheme of Arrangement, subject to it being approved, HSBC CardGuard customers will be contacted with regards to a redress payment, and for those who aren't, HSBC will also consider complaints from any other CardGuard customer who feels they may have been mis-sold to.'


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2399464/Hamish-Ogston-founder-firm-mis-sold-insurance-7-MILLION-rubbishes-1-3BILLION-compensation-order.html#ixzz2coi7zUH9
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Thursday, August 22, 2013

Five Hours Later NASDARK Speaks: Twas But A "Glitch"

Still stunned by today's epic market failure? The NASDARK finally chimes in, but don't expect to get much actual information. Via Bloomberg:
  • NASDAQ SAYS WILL WORK WITH OTHER EXCHANGES ON `GLITCH'
  • NASDAQ STATEMENT SAYS 'TECHNICAL ISSUES RESOLVED'
  • NASDAQ SAYS TECHNICAL ISSUES WERE RESOLVED IN FIRST 3O MINUTES
  • NASDAQ SAYS IT COORDINATED WITH OTHER EXCHANGES FOR REOPENING
  • NASDAQ SAYS THAT PRICE QUOTES WEREN'T BEING DISSEMINATED BY SIP
  • NASDAQ SAYS BALANCE OF TRADING WAS DAY WAS FINISHED IN NORMAL COURSE
  • NASDAQ SAYS IT SUPPORTS ANY STEPS NEEDED TO ENHANCE PLATFORM
Like we said, no actual information. No mention of how the AAPL plunge below mysteriously set off the SIP choke leading to the wholesale trading halt; no mention of why AAPL traded after opening with a tractor beam just above $500; no mention of who may have been in for a rude awakening had the market not halted and had the AAPL fall continued, etc.
Because like every other time a computer goes haywire, which lately is all the time, it was merely a "glitch" and so you must acquit, because no humans were involved in the making of this mockery of what was once an equity market.

Nasdaq Shuts Trading for Three Hours After Computer Errors

Computer malfunctions shook American equity trading for the second time this week, freezing thousands of stocks listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market for three hours and raising fresh concerns about the fragility of exchanges.
The second-biggest American exchange operator, home to 3,200 companies from 37 countries, halted transactions in all of its securities shortly after noon, a decision that caused buying and selling to stop on its platform and dozens of others where the securities trade. Errors in the feed used to disseminate quotes and prices were to blame, Nasdaq said on its website.
Many of the country’s most-traded shares, from Apple Inc. (AAPL) to Intel Corp. and Facebook Inc., ground to a virtual standstill as brokers were unable to execute customer orders. Nasdaq equity indexes didn’t update during the outage and volume in stocks listed on the rival New YorkStock Exchange also dwindled as liquidity dried up around the country.
“The real fear is that we get stuck wearing some kind of risk because of an interruption that is not of our doing,” Max Breier, a senior equity derivatives trader at BMO Capital Markets Corp. in New York, said in a phone interview. “Any halt in information or ability to trade is going to hinder our ability to manage our risk and take positions.”

Afternoon Resumption

Shares covered by the halt began to change hands again at about 3:25 p.m. in New York. Nasdaq let stand transactions executed between 12:14 p.m. and 12:23 p.m. Open orders were not automatically canceled and customers were told they could cancel them voluntarily before trading resumed, the exchange company said on its website.
President Barack Obama was briefed on the disruption this afternoon by his chief of staff,Denis McDonoughJosh Earnest, deputy White House press secretary, said in an e-mail to reporters traveling with the president in upstate New York. The Securities and Exchange Commission was also monitoring the situation.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew saw no reason to believe the halt had “any of the more frightening aspects to it, but we’re going to have to learn all the facts.” He was questioned about the shutdown by a moderator today after a speech in Mountain View, California.
The disruption, just two days after options markets were roiled by mistaken trades sent by Goldman Sachs Group Inc., is the latest in a series of computer malfunctions that have raised questions about the reliability of electronic markets. Nasdaq faced criticism last year when it mishandled the public debut of Facebook, causing losses for its member firms.

Another Headache

Though the cause was unclear, the outage is more bad news for Robert Greifeld, the Nasdaq chief executive officer whose reputation suffered following the Facebook IPO. Company representatives didn’t respond to e-mails and phone calls asking what triggered the breakdown.
“This is just another one of those headaches that are going on with this electronic stuff,”Frank Ingarra, head trader at Greenwich, Connecticut-based NorthCoast Asset Management LLC, said in a phone interview.
The action froze stocks both on Nasdaq’s platforms and dozens of other markets around the country that trade securities it lists. Exchanges from Bats Global Markets Inc. in Lenexa,Kansas, to Jersey City, New Jersey-based Direct Edge Holdings published notices saying they were adopting Nasdaq’s halt.

Lower Volume

The disruption resulted in the second-fewest number of shares changing hands on U.S. exchanges in at least five years during a full-day session. About 4.4 billion shares tradedtoday, 30 percent below the three-month average. Volume was lower only on Oct. 8, 2012, excluding holiday trading, according to data Bloomberg began compiling in 2008.
About 740 million exchange-listed shares changed hands during the three hours through 3:20 p.m. in New York following the suspension, or a third of the total transactions over the first three hours today, data compiled by Bloomberg show.
Nasdaq’s own shares, which were covered by the halt, fell 3.4 percent to $30.46 at the 4 p.m. close in New York. They’re up 22 percent in 2013. The Nasdaq Composite Index (CCMP), which didn’t move during the outage, gained 1.1 percent to 3,638.71, while the Nasdaq 100 climbed 1 percent to 3,101.82.
The Dow Jones Industrial Average (INDU), which includes Nasdaq-listed Microsoft Corp. and Cisco Systems Inc., was calculated throughout the day using the shares’ last price. It gained 0.4 percent to 14,963.74. Among Nasdaq stocks, Apple increased 0.1 percent to $502.96 and Intel added 0.4 percent to $22.26.

‘Big Deal’

“It’s a big deal for the Nasdaq, but it wasn’t as impactful on the market as you would expect,”Douglas Kass, the founder of Palm Beach, Florida-based Seabreeze Partners Management Inc., said in a phone interview. “There’ll be some residual loss of confidence on the part of retail investors, but beyond that I don’t think it’ll have impact.”
Trading failures are multiplying as global financial markets get more complex. U.S. equity trading, which began on Wall Street more than two centuries ago and was dominated by the New York Stock Exchange for most of that period, has become dispersed among more than 50 computerized platforms accessible around the world.
Individual investors have showed signs of embracing equities this year. Almost $95 billion was poured into exchange-traded funds that own American shares this year, while a measure of historical price swings indicates the U.S. market is the calmest in more than six years compared with shares from China, Brazil, India and Russia.

Flight Risk

“A trading halt is pretty big on a major public market,” Douglas Cote, chief market strategist at ING U.S. Investment Management in New York, said in a telephone interview. His firm oversees $190 billion. “It’s kind of like being in an airplane. It’s risky. Even though planes have had some problems, you don’t not fly because of it.”
Signs of strain appeared earlier when NYSE’s Arca canceled orders for Nasdaq shares and other exchanges routed trades away from the electronic platform through a procedure known as self-help. Just before 12:30 p.m., shares of Yahoo! Inc. briefly plunged more than a dollar over about a dozen trades. Intel surged 20 cents or more in a handful of transactions.
“We are monitoring the situation and are in close contact with the exchanges,” SEC spokesman John Nester said.
Sean Oblack, a spokesman for Senate Banking Committee Chairman Tim Johnson, said in an e-mail statement that the panel’s staff “has been following the issues, is in contact with the SEC and will continue to monitor additional developments.”

Hungry Squirrels

American stock markets regularly shut down as share volume rose in the late 1960s before computers were in widespread use. According to the Depository Trust & Clearing Corp.’s website, exchanges closed every Wednesday and shortened trading hours as daily share volume of 10 million to 12 million shares meant ’’brokers were literally buried in paperwork.’’
Today’s outage was worse than an approximately 40-minute shutdown in 1994 that was triggered when a squirrel chewed through a power line in Shelton, Conn., disrupting electricity near a Nasdaq computer facility in Trumbull. That same year, a communications-software error shut the exchange for two-and-a-half hours. Another squirrel was to blame for a 1987 outage that last 82 minutes, according to a New York Times report at the time.
Options markets were bombarded with erroneous orders two days ago when an internal computer at Goldman Sachs malfunctioned. Options officials at Nasdaq as well as NYSE Amex and CBOE Holdings spent almost a day reviewing orders for cancellation.

China Error

Investors in China were whipsawed by a computer malfunction last week. State-controlled brokerage Everbright Securities Co. reported a trading loss of 194 million yuan ($32 million) and apologized to investors after errors in order-execution systems on Aug. 16 sparked the biggest intraday swing in China’s benchmark index since 2009. The incident touched off a 53 percent surge in volume in the Shanghai Composite Index, which jumped from a loss of as much as 1 percent to a gain of 5.6 percent in two minutes. Xu Haoming resigned as president of the firm four days after regulators announced a probe.
In May, Nasdaq agreed to pay $10 million to settle SEC charges related to the initial public offering of Facebook. Regulators cited it for its “poor systems and decision-making” during the IPO in May 2012 that was delayed when software that collects orders fell into a loop. Nasdaq agreed to the settlement without admitting or denying the SEC’s findings.

Facebook Fine

The SEC penalty was imposed because Nasdaq failed in its obligation to ensure that systems, processes and contingency planning are robust and adequate to manage an IPO without disruption to the market, the agency said.
Legislation that created the SEC in 1934 also deemed the main venues self-regulatory organizations, or SROs, overseeing their member firms and trading. Critics said the Facebook mishap shows how changes in the structure of markets have made old regulations obsolete and that firms such as Nasdaq should be regulated like any other for-profit company.
Exchanges have close to absolute legal protection for actions taken as part of their regulatory duties. The doctrine arose when exchanges were not-for-profit organizations owned by their member firms. The shield protects them from lawsuits related to the exercise of powers delegated by the SEC and prevents financial losses that could jeopardize institutions seen as vital to the U.S. economy.

Nasdaq Market Halts Trading

A trading halt on the Nasdaq Stock Market NDAQ +0.82% neared an hour after an unexplained technical issue, paralyzing the market for thousands of securities and raising new questions about the robustness of U.S. trading systems following a series of high-profile glitches.
The second-largest U.S. stock exchange expected to resume trading shortly, a person familiar with the matter said just after 1 p.m. ET. The exchange said in a notice to traders that it wouldn't cancel open orders, but that customers could do so. The exchange would resume trading at a time "to be determined," the notice said.
The outage saw a large chunk of the U.S. stock market effectively come to a standstill at midday, freezing prices in stocks, exchange-traded funds and options listed on Nasdaq and prompting other trading venues to stop trading those securities. Dark pools and other electronic trading platforms were also forced to suspend trading in Nasdaq-listed stocks, since there were no publicly quoted prices on those securities, traders said.
Traders said there was confusion about what stocks were affected, and that phones were lighting up across trading desks as investors tried to figure out what as happening.
"We're pulling out our orders to wait until the system works itself out," Rick Fier, director of equity trading at Conifer Securities. "The best thing clients can do is take a break."

Wednesday, August 21, 2013

GALLUP: UNEMPLOYMENT RATE JUMPS FROM 7.7% TO 8.9% IN 30 DAYS

Outside of the federal government's Bureau of Labor statistics, the Gallup polling organization also tracks the nation's unemployment rate. While the BLS and Gallup findings might not always perfectly align, the trends almost always do and the small statistical differences just haven't been worthy of note. But now Gallup is showing a sizable 30 day jump in the unemployment rate, from 7.7% on July 21 to 8.9% today.

This is an 18-month high.
At the end of July, the BLS showed a 7.4% unemployment rate, compared to Gallup's 7.8%. Again, a difference not worthy of note. But Gallup's upward trend to almost 9% in just the last three weeks is alarming, especially because this is not a poll with a history of wild swings due to statistical anomalies. Gallup's sample size is  a massive 30,000 adults and the rolling average is taken over a full 30 day period.
Gallup also shows an alarming increase in the number of underemployed (those with some work seeking more). During the same 30-day period, that number has jumped from 17.1% to 17.9%.

British Virgin Islands in US tax evasion talks

The British Virgin Islands (BVI) has begun talks with US authorities over compliance with a law designed to crack down on offshore tax evasion.
The BVI, home to about 30,000 people and 500,000 registered companies, is one of the world's biggest offshore trust jurisdictions.
Rules coming into force next year will mean US taxpayers must disclose greater detail about assets held abroad.
BVI Premier Orlando Smith said talks with the US were the best way forward.
Jurisdictions such as the BVI provide incorporation registration, so that businesses and super-rich investors can claim they are based on the islands and so avoid taxes in countries where their work is carried out.
Last week, the Cayman Islands agreed with the US on providing information on accounts held by US citizens and residents.
Mr Smith told a news briefing that his administration was negotiating an "intergovernmental agreement" with Washington to comply with the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act.
"We are of the very considered opinion that this course is the best one to adopt for the BVI," he said.
Officials on the Caribbean jurisdictions of the Bahamas and Bermuda have also said they intend to comply with the US regulations.

Unwinding Of Unsustainable Speculative Positions

Some participants also stated that financial developments during the intermeeting period might have helped put the financial system on a more sustainable footing, insofar as those developments were associated with an unwinding of unsustainable speculative positionsor an increase in term premiums from extraordinarily low levels.

Bitcoin Spawns China Virtual IPOs as U.S. Scrutiny Grows

Sun Minjie is a 28-year-old Internet worker who lives in Beijing. Eager to profit from growing demand for the digital currency, Sun has invested more than $3,000 in a company called 796 Xchange Ltd., an online exchange for trading stocks and other financial instruments related to Bitcoin, where initial public offerings are also being held.
He’s part of a small but growing group of investors in China who have put the country into contention with the U.S. as the biggest downloader of the virtual money that’s being used to buy a growing range of goods and services online. While intensified scrutiny by U.S. regulators casts doubt on the currency’s future there, China’s Bitcoin industry is expanding.
“What’s worrisome is that a lot of people could be just treating it as a speculative investment,” said Peter Pak, head of trading of BOCI Securities Ltd. in Hong Kong. “In China, the stock market, property and bond market are all not so good, so people get really excited when they hear of a new investment that generates high returns.”
Sun’s outlay of about 28 Bitcoins -- or $3,108 -- for more than 400 shares in 796 Xchange has returned about 46 percent since the stock’s Aug. 1 debut on the company’s own website. The benchmark Shanghai Composite Index (SHCOMP) has only gained about 2 percent during the same period.

‘Expensive to Crack’

Bitcoin is similar to other currencies -- say, the Mexican peso-- except it’s not controlled by any government and the total number is capped at about 21 million coins. Computer users can “mine” them by solving mathematical puzzles -- uncovering the hidden series of letters and numbers that matches up with security keys specified by the computer programmers who invented Bitcoin in 2009. As more are mined, the puzzles get harder, and therefore more expensive to crack.
Sun turned to shares of Bitcoin companies after initially trying to mine the currency crunching algorithms on souped-up PCs at his office and home. He gave up after a month, concluding that his computers weren’t up to the task.
“Simple desktops can no longer dig them up,” he said.
There are about 11.5 million Bitcoins in circulation, according to Blockchain.info, which tracks the virtual currency. At today’s price of about $121, there’s still $1.15 billion to unearth. The inherent scarcity of Bitcoin that was intended to help secure its value has also attracted early investors -- Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, the twins known for their claim to have co-founded Facebook Inc. (FB), own about 1 percent of the currency in issue.

Bigger Drills

Prices have been volatile, with the value of one Bitcoin varying from $84 to $266 in the span of one week in April, according to Tokyo-based Mt. Gox, the largest exchange that allows Bitcoin to be traded for dollars, euros and other currencies.
More advanced miners use specially designed gadgets that cost as much as 86 Bitcoins, about $10,407, in order to mine the digital currency.
Labcoin, managed by Hong Kong-based ITec-Pro Ltd., also began trading its shares this month in a virtual market. The seller of virtual-mining equipment had a market value of 20,000 Bitcoins, or about $2.4 million. Another company that sold shares is Myminer, which operates “mining farms” in China, where it says the low cost of power to run computers gives it an edge. BTC Garden, a Shenzhen-based Bitcoin miner, withdrew its IPO this month, citing a dispute with an investor.
Hong Kong-incorporated 796 Xchange offers an online stock market for Bitcoin companies, as well as futures, financing and IPO services, all priced in Bitcoins, according to its website.

Regulatory Probe

BTCChina.com, China’s most popular Bitcoin exchange, lets traders to use the payment systems of more established companies. That includes Tencent Holdings Ltd. (700), the nation’s biggest Internet company, and Alipay, an affiliate of Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., the No. 1 e-commerce company. Other Bitcoin trading platforms popular in China includeFXBTC.com and Btctrade.com.
China briefly overtook the U.S. in monthly downloads of Bitcoins in May, and now ranks second, according to SourceForge.
In the U.S., the Securities and Exchange Commission sued a Texas man over claims he operated a Bitcoin Ponzi scheme. New York’s Department of Financial Services this month sent subpoenas to 22 digital-currency companies to determine whether new regulations should be adopted, according to a person familiar with the matter.
The lack of regulation, which has drawn scrutiny from U.S. regulators, is why Bitcoins are taking off in China, where the government controls the flow of money overseas and keeps a tight rein on what it views as undesirable behavior.

‘Bitcoin is Freedom’

“The advantage for Chinese users to use Bitcoin is freedom, people can do something without any official authority,” said Patrick Lin, system administrator of Erights.net and owner of about 1,500 Bitcoins. Lin said he’s sticking to the currency itself, rather than IPOs, in part because of weak regulation. “The Bitcoin world is just like the Wild West -- no law, but opportunity and risk,” he said.
The China Securities Regulatory Commission didn’t respond to a faxed query on whether it’s looking at new rules regarding Bitcoin. So long as it remains small, the industry may continue to fly below the radar screen of a Chinese government more preoccupied with a faltering economy and social stability.
“If the circulation of Bitcoins is still confined to a small circle of people, it won’t be something on the Chinese authority’s priority list,” said Edward Au, co-head of Deloitte China’s public-offering group. “They already have too much to cope with.”

Tuesday, August 20, 2013

What Is Going To Happen If Interest Rates Continue To Rise Rapidly?

Submitted by Michael Snyder of The Economic Collapse blog [24],
If you want to track how close we are to the next financial collapse, there is one number that you need to be watching above all others.  The number that I am talking about is the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries, because it affects thousands of other interest rates in our financial system.  When the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries goes up, that is bad for the U.S. economy because it pushes long-term interest rates up.  When interest rates rise, it constricts the flow of credit, and a healthy flow of credit is absolutely essential to the debt-based system that we live in.
Just imagine someone squeezing a tube that has water flowing through it.  The higher interest rates go, the more economic activity will be squeezed.  If interest rates continue to rise rapidly, it will be more expensive for the U.S. government to borrow money, it will be more expensive for state and local governments to borrow money, the housing market may crash again, consumer debt will become more expensive, junk bond investors will be in for a world of hurt, the stock market will experience a tremendous amount of pain and there is a good chance that we could see the 441 trillion dollar interest rate derivatives bubble [25] implode.  And that is just for starters.
So yes, we all need to be carefully watching the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries.  On Friday, it opened at 2.76% and hit a high of 2.86% before closing at 2.83%.  The yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries is up nearly 120 basis points since the beginning of May, and almost everyone on Wall Street seems convinced that it is going to go much higher.
We are truly moving into unprecedented territory, because we have been in a bull market for U.S. Treasuries for the last 30 years.  Many investors don't even know that it is possible to lose money on U.S. Treasuries.  They have been described as "risk-free" investments, but that is far from the truth.
In fact, we could see bond investors of all types end up losing trillions of dollars before it is all said and done.
And those in the stock market will lose lots of money too.  Low interest rates are good for economic activity which is good for the stock market.  The chart posted below shows that stock prices have generally risen as the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries has steadily declined over the past 30 years...
CFPGH-DJIA-20
When interest rates rise, that is bad for economic activity and bad for stocks.  That is why so many stock analysts are alarmed that interest rates are going up so rapidly right now.
And as I wrote about the other day, we have just witnessed the largest cluster of Hindenburg Omens [26] that we have seen since before the last financial crisis.  The stock market already seems ripe for a huge "adjustment", and rising interest rates could give it a huge extra push in a negative direction.
By the time it is all said and done, stock market investors could end up losing trillions of dollars in the next stock market crash.
In addition, rising interest rates could easily precipitate another housing crash.  As the Wall Street Journal [27] discussed on Friday, as the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries goes up it will also cause mortgage rates to rise...
Higher yields will push up long-term borrowing cost for U.S. consumers and businesses. Mortgage rates will rise, and investors are keeping a close eye on whether this may derail the recovery of the housing market, which has shown signs of turning a corner this year.
In one of my previous articles [28], I included an example that shows just how powerful rising mortgage rates can be...
A year ago, the 30 year rate was sitting at 3.66 percent.  The monthly payment on a 30 year, $300,000 mortgage at that rate would be$1374.07.

If the 30 year rate rises to 8 percent, the monthly payment on a 30 year, $300,000 mortgage at that rate would be $2201.29.

Does 8 percent sound crazy to you?

It shouldn't.  8 percent was considered to be normal back in the year 2000.
If you own a $300,000 house today, do you think it will be easier to sell it or harder to sell it if mortgage rates skyrocket?
Yes, of course it will be much harder.  In fact, there is a good chance that you will have to reduce your selling price significantly so that prospective buyers can afford the payments.
Let us hope that the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries levels off for a while.  If it says at this current level, the damage will probably not be too bad.
But if it crosses the 3 percent mark and keeps soaring, things could get messy pretty quickly.  In fact, according to a Bank of America Merrill Lynch investor survey [29], the 3.5 percent mark is when the collapse of the bond market is likely to become "disorderly"...
Our latest Credit Investor Survey, conducted July 8-11, showed that 3.5% on the 10-year is most commonly thought of as the trigger of a disorderly rotation – i.e. higher interest rates leading to outflows and wider credit spreads – among high grade investors.

Put differently, 3.0% on the 10-year will not lead to overall wider credit spreads if there is enough buying interest from institutional investors (though note that the 10s/30s spread curve would flatten further, as mutual fund/ETF holdings are concentrated in the belly of the curve, whereas institutional demand is disproportional in the long end of the curve). However, if the probability of a further move higher in interest rates to 3.5% is high – which will be the perception if interest rate volatility is high – certain institutional investors will choose to remain on the sidelines.

Thus there may not be enough institutional buying interest to mitigate retail fund outflows and contain overall high grade spread levels.
So what is causing this?
Well, there are a number of factors of course, but one very disturbing sign is that foreigners are selling off U.S. Treasuries [30] at a pace that we have not seen since 2007...
One of the biggest fears in the financial markets is that foreign investors will stop buying U.S. Treasury securities, causing borrowing rates to surge.

Not that this is the beginning of a frightening trend, but new data from the Treasury Department shows that foreigners were net sellers in June. In fact, this is the largest net sale of U.S. securities since August 2007.
Do you remember all of the warnings that we have received over the years about what would take place when foreign countries started dumping U.S. debt?
Well, it looks like it may be starting to happen.
Unfortunately, there is no way that the party that the U.S. government has been throwing can continue without foreigners buying our debt.  We have added more than 11 trillion dollars to the national debt since the year 2000, and according to Boston University economist Laurence Kotlikoff we are facing unfunded liabilities in future years that are in excess of 200 trillion dollars.
Even with foreigners continuing to loan us gigantic mountains of super cheap money, it would still take a doubling of our taxes [31] to put us on a fiscally sustainable course...
Writing in the September issue of Finance and Development, a journal of the International Monetary Fund, Prof. Kotlikoff says the IMF itself has quietly confirmed that the U.S. is in terrible fiscal trouble - far worse than the Washington-based lender of last resort has previously acknowledged. "The U.S. fiscal gap is huge," the IMF asserted in a June report. "Closing the fiscal gap requires a permanent annual fiscal adjustment equal to about 14 per cent of U.S. GDP."
This sum is equal to all current U.S. federal taxes combined. The consequences of the IMF's fiscal fix, a doubling of federal taxes in perpetuity, would be appalling - and possibly worse than appalling.

Prof. Kotlikoff says: "The IMF is saying that, to close this fiscal gap [by taxation] would require an immediate and permanent doubling of our personal income taxes, our corporate taxes and all other federal taxes.

"America's fiscal gap is enormous - so massive that closing it appears impossible without immediate and radical reforms to its health care, tax and Social Security systems - as well as military and other discretionary spending cuts."
Can you afford to pay twice as much in taxes to the federal government?
Very few Americans could.
But that is how serious the financial problems of the federal government are.
And all of the above assumes that interest payments on U.S. government debt will remain at current levels.  If the average rate of interest on U.S. government debt rises to just 6 percent, the U.S. government will be paying out a trillion dollars a year just in interest on the national debt.
Also, all of the above assumes that we will have a healthy financial system that does not need to be bailed out again.
But if rapidly rising interest rates cause the 441 trillion dollar interest rate derivatives bubble to implode [32], the bailout that the "too big to fail" banks will need will likely be far, far larger than last time.
In fact, once that bubble bursts there probably will not be enough money in the entire world to fix it.
If the picture that I have painted above sounds bleak, that is because it is bleak.
Sometimes I get frustrated with myself because I don't feel I am communicating the tremendous danger that we are facing accurately enough.
We are heading for the worst financial crisis in modern human history, and the debt-fueled prosperity that we are enjoying today is going to go away and it is never going to come back.
You can dismiss that as "doom and gloom" and stick your head in the sand if you want, but that isn't going to help anything.  Instead of ignoring reality you should be working hard to prepare your family for what is coming and warning others that they should be getting prepared too.
When a hurricane is approaching landfall, you don't take your family out for a picnic at the beach.  That would be foolish.  Unfortunately, way too many Americans are acting as if nothing like the financial crisis of 2008 could ever possibly happen again.
If you deceive yourself into thinking that all of this is going to have a happy ending somehow, you are going to get blindsided by the coming storm.
But if you make preparations now, you might just be okay.
There is hope in understanding what is happening and there is hope in getting prepared.
So watch the yield on 10 year U.S. Treasuries.  The higher it goes, the later in the game we are.