rescue fund

Reading Between The Lines: Why Eurozone Improvement is Being Ignored

Published on the Front Page of Huffington Post Business

Markets have shrugged off improvement in the Eurozone because more is needed for stability. Rising demand for German goods, an improving business climate and stability in Spanish housing should have given markets cause for celebration. However, after the substantial rally we’ve seen, and the headwinds yet to be tackled within the region, caution has crept back into markets.

Absence of Growth and Currency Risk

There is deep concern over Europe’s ability to kickstart growth, as austerity measures dampen economic expansion and a strong euro stifles exports. The increase in demand for German factory goods interestingly was driven by demand within the euro area. Domestic demand was weak and the currency still source of concern abroad. Furthermore, despite an overall improving business climate, uncertainty in the political and economic landscape going forward is causing delay in hiring and investment.

Spain Precarious and Firepower Lacking

Once again hitting the headlines, Spain could derail European stability, as corruption charges are directed at the government while they continue to grapple with a large budget deficit. The latest data points to a possible floor in Spanish housing prices but defaults on bank loans due to the real estate bubble remains elevated and there is only limited further financial aid available directly from the rescue fund. In order to meet its main obligation of lending to struggling countries, additional direct bank aid has been rumoured to amount to less than €100bn, nowhere near enough to contain future turmoil!

Reform and Unity Needed

With France expected to have slipped back into recession, Draghi, the European Central Bank President, is right to warn that the region is not in the clear yet. What’s needed now are structural reform and closer fiscal and political unity. Only with a return of confidence, based on improving fundamentals, can stability return.

rafa-sanudo-euro-crisisstock market

Advertisements

Why Market Moves Have Been Misguided

As U.S. stocks and the European equity index ended last week in positive territory, against a backdrop of disappointing data, market moves seems misplaced. Instead, Central Bank action is cosmetic not medicinal, a tool for reassurance not economic change. Developments from the recent EU Summit are either temporary or limited and capital remains restricted. However, economic deterioration heats up the pressure for action. Therefore, Central Banks are damned if they act and damned if they don’t. For sentiment to turn, we need to see signs of stability, as well as support.

Watch this being hotly debated on CNBC, with an entertaining edge…

Central Bank Action is Cosmetic Not Medicinal

Central bank action is being met with scepticism, and initial market rallies used as selling opportunities for profit taking. This is because moves are cosmetic and not medicinal, as in the short term they may reassure markets that measures are being taken, but they are of limited effectiveness at significantly boosting growth. Even Draghi himself, the President of the European Central Bank, argued “price signals (have) relatively limited immediate effect”. They won’t stimulate demand and, by potentially hurting bank profitability, could reduce the incentive to lend – the opposite of the target outcome.

Nevertheless, for the first time, we have seen the ECB cut the benchmark interest rate below 1%. In the same week, the Bank of England announced it will be increasing asset purchases by £50m. With weak US data and Bernanke already cautious, the pressure will be on to turn ‘Operation Twist’ into a more traditional waltz. Investors will be hoping the Fed will pump more liquidity into the system instead of ‘twisting’ or neutralising purchases by selling elsewhere along the yield curve.

Summit Moves Are Limited

The outcome of extensive talks at the EU Summit likewise fuelled a ‘false rally’. Spanish government bonds have since returned to hover around the unsustainable 7% level again despite developments. Instead, the 3 key ‘achievements’ are temporary or limited, as explained below…

1.     Senior not guaranteed: Investors have been moved higher up the pecking order and will now be repaid for loans made to Spanish banks before the bailout fund. Being the ‘first’ in line to get money back is indeed an improvement but crucially the risk of loss is still there and may continue to worry the markets.

2.     Wishful thinking? The government has been removed from the equation with bailout funds now able to offer loans to struggling Spanish banks directly. Removing government involvement in bank bailouts to protects sovereign bond yields ignores the possibility investors will continue to view the health of the banks as a driver of economic health.

3.     Bond buying boost limited: Bailout funds may now buy debt directly from “solvent countries” (read: Italy). However, this is a limited source of demand and again short-sighted.

Capital Remains Restricted

The size of the problem remains a key concern and a crucial measure missing from the Summit was a substantial strengthening of the ‘firewalls’. At €500bn, the rescue fund is only 20% of the €2.4tn combined debt burden of Spain and Italy. The risk that a lack of funding will leave European leaders unable to stop the crisis spreading remains.

Economic Deterioration Heats up the Pressure for Action

With a backdrop of a deteriorating economic environment, Europe is far from able to ‘grow out of the problem’. German manufacturing deteriorated for 4th consecutive month. Relied upon as a rare source of growth, the outlook is dimming. European unemployment has reached its highest level since the creation euro. This is unlikely to spur spending and instead put the pressure back on Central Banks to do something to kick-start economic growth.

Therefore, Central Banks are damned if they act and damned if they don’t. For sentiment to turn, we need to see signs of stability, as well as support.

Note some of this article has been published by the Financial Times

The EU ‘Rescue Fund’ – Part of The Problem Not The Solution

There is still much to be decided before EU leaders can claim to have provided a comprehensive and credible plan to end the sovereign debt crisis. The rescue fund itself has met with significant obstacles, with demand in doubt and delays to capital raising leading to question marks over its ability to borrow on behalf of those that can’t. Instead of improving sentiment, it may cause it to deteriorate. Details, commitment, growth, structural reforms and greater consolidation of governance, fiscal policy and politics are needed. This has become a global issue.

Deutsche Bank, Germany’s biggest bank, and Credit Agricole, the largest retail banking group in France, rallied more than 19% over the last week in October after certain ‘positive’ news was announced at EU Summit. Measures included the leveraging of the rescue fund to €1tn, a voluntary default of Greek debt and bank recapitalisation. However, this may involve a dangerous derivative structure with insurance coverage not guaranteed and demands not going far enough.

Delays could hit sentiment, deadline looming

The European Financial Stability Fund (a.k.a. the ‘rescue fund’) was created to borrow on behalf of those countries that found themselves unable to borrow (read Greece, Ireland, Portugal etc). However, Wednesday’s attempt to raise capital met a substantial obstacle – limited demand, leaving the fund itself unable to borrow. The €3bn 10-year bond offering had to be postponed, in the hope conditions would improve but a ‘red flag’ has been raised. If this fund is already having issues, at its current size with a lending capacity of €440bn, how will it manage with demands up to €1tn? Inadequate demand could cause sentiment to deteriorate, worsening the very situation it was meant to improve.

Demand from the East now in doubt

Plans to leverage the current fund to enable this €1tn of firepower seem to be heavily reliant on demand from the likes of China and Japan. This makes their apparent lack of interest in this recent bond offering most worrying. Investors have maintained the situation is too opaque and the risk/reward potential too skewed to the downside.

Dangerous derivative structure

The ‘Special Purpose Investment Vehicle’ which would allow this leveraging to occur has been likened to a CDO – collateralised debt obligation and the instrument that was at the heart of the subprime crisis, by insuring investors against loss. The bonds act as collateral so investors effectively buy junk sovereign debt with a certain level of guarantee from the fund.

The Greek ‘haircut’ has highlighted some of the risks. The ‘writedown’ of debt was structured as ‘voluntary’. It was agreed that private bond holders should offer to write off half of the amount Greece owed them versus a formal, official, enforced default. The latter would be classified as a credit event and trigger any insurers to pay up. However, the former doesn’t. Therefore investors who insured against losses paid a premium for cover but won’t get paid out to offset the losses suffered. The risk of a debt ‘default’ may not always be mitigated.

 Doesn’t cover all that is needed

More details are needed to understand how bailout facilities will be implemented and hopes for the first signs of commitment from the IMF, China and Japan were dashed at the G20 Meeting last Thursday and Friday. Moreover, the recapitalisation of the banks, which was set at €140bn will need to be increased dramatically. The IMF already put the level at €200bn, with analysts advising a number nearer €275bn.

Finally, the fund does not compensate for what the EU really needs: growth, structural reforms and greater consolidation of governance, fiscal policy and politics. The EU’s jobless figures are the highest they’ve been since the launch of the euro. Draghi may have put the focus back on growth by cutting interest rates, in a move that surprised the markets, from 1.5% to 1.25% but admitted growth forecasts are likely to be downgraded so the EU economy will remain fragile for some time. Accounting for approximately 24% of global GDP and with lower demand hitting export-oriented Asian countries, as for example Taiwan expands at its slowest rate for 2 years.

This is a global issue.