Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Economy
In reply to the discussion: Weekend Economists Waiting for FDR July 13-15, 2012 [View all]Demeter
(85,373 posts)34. Corporations Dodge LIBOR Scandal Bullet: It’s banks and hedge funds that look like the losers.
http://www3.cfo.com/article/2012/7/credit_libor-scandal-barclays-british-bankers-association-pension-funds-rpi?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+cfo/daily_briefing+%28Latest+Articles+from+CFO.com%29&utm_content=Google+Reader
In the wake of the ongoing LIBOR scandal, corporations looking to fruitfully sue Barclays or any other bank on the basis of ill-gotten gain may find it hard to make a convincing case.
In the words of a knowledgeable treasury expert who spoke on condition of anonymity, We have struggled to find who the net losers are, apart from the banks themselves, and maybe some hedge funds.
Between 2007 and 2009, Barclays (and perhaps other banks) deliberately submitted low interbank interest-rate data to the British Bankers Assn. (BBA), which calculates the London interbank offered rate (LIBOR). For the following reasons, it is difficult to see how corporates could have suffered as a result.
LIBOR is not used for wholesale deposit rates: the rate paid is negotiated directly with the bank or through a broker. The rate the bank agrees to will be a blended rate, taking into account several factors of which LIBOR may be just one. Any mispricing of LIBOR could not have had anything but a very negligible impact, if any, on the agreed deposit rate.
Commercial-property mortgages tied to LIBOR would have been cheaper, not more expensive, as a result of the manipulation.
Corporates that issued fixed-rate bonds and then swapped back into floating rates would have received fixed and paid LIBOR, which has been understated: again, that is to the benefit of the corporate.
A corporate swapping floating for fixed debt would be paying floating rates on its borrowing, receiving floating on the swap, and then paying a fixed rate. Its therefore both receiving and paying understated LIBOR-related rates: a net neutral.
If you work through all these swaps, its very hard to figure out who is losing apart from the banks. Youve really got to put your thinking cap on to think of a circumstance which might possibly give rise to a cost, the treasury expert said. If you were running a purely speculative swap portfolio, you might be able to construct something in which you lost out, but thats not what corporates do. It might be what hedge funds do, however....MORE
In the wake of the ongoing LIBOR scandal, corporations looking to fruitfully sue Barclays or any other bank on the basis of ill-gotten gain may find it hard to make a convincing case.
In the words of a knowledgeable treasury expert who spoke on condition of anonymity, We have struggled to find who the net losers are, apart from the banks themselves, and maybe some hedge funds.
Between 2007 and 2009, Barclays (and perhaps other banks) deliberately submitted low interbank interest-rate data to the British Bankers Assn. (BBA), which calculates the London interbank offered rate (LIBOR). For the following reasons, it is difficult to see how corporates could have suffered as a result.
LIBOR is not used for wholesale deposit rates: the rate paid is negotiated directly with the bank or through a broker. The rate the bank agrees to will be a blended rate, taking into account several factors of which LIBOR may be just one. Any mispricing of LIBOR could not have had anything but a very negligible impact, if any, on the agreed deposit rate.
Commercial-property mortgages tied to LIBOR would have been cheaper, not more expensive, as a result of the manipulation.
Corporates that issued fixed-rate bonds and then swapped back into floating rates would have received fixed and paid LIBOR, which has been understated: again, that is to the benefit of the corporate.
A corporate swapping floating for fixed debt would be paying floating rates on its borrowing, receiving floating on the swap, and then paying a fixed rate. Its therefore both receiving and paying understated LIBOR-related rates: a net neutral.
If you work through all these swaps, its very hard to figure out who is losing apart from the banks. Youve really got to put your thinking cap on to think of a circumstance which might possibly give rise to a cost, the treasury expert said. If you were running a purely speculative swap portfolio, you might be able to construct something in which you lost out, but thats not what corporates do. It might be what hedge funds do, however....MORE
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
69 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Corporations Dodge LIBOR Scandal Bullet: It’s banks and hedge funds that look like the losers.
Demeter
Jul 2012
#34
Unfortunately, they're probabaly right that it'll take a long time to sort out the consequences; but
snot
Jul 2012
#59
How Out-of-Control Credit Markets Threaten Liberty, Democracy and Economic Security By Ed Harrison
Demeter
Jul 2012
#30
The Great Capitalist Heist: How Paris Hilton’s Dogs Ended Up Better Off Than You
Demeter
Jul 2012
#35
Another "this should be a separate thread", and what of the outcome for this repeat? I'd love to
mother earth
Jul 2012
#39