Bernard Thomas'  Instablog

Bernard Thomas
Send Message
My real name is Thomas Byrne and I was a Fixed Income specialist at Citigroup. I was the auther of "Making Sense," the most widely-read commentary report at the firm.
My company:
Bond Squad
My blog:
Bond Squad
  • The Mortgage Debacle Explained 2 comments
    Oct 15, 2010 10:51 PM | about stocks: BAC, JPM, C

    Panic has gripped the markets. Apparently, banks have not been observing the proprieties when foreclosing on delinquent home owners. This has cause some banks to halt foreclosure proceedings while proper due diligence is under taken and paperwork is processed in accordance with the stated rules and regulations. This has many investors selling their corporate bond and preferred holdings of large banks, especially Bank of America. Relax folks, although bank bottom lines could be hit due to increased legal expenses and overhead to properly process foreclosures, it is unlikely that the damage will be enough to sink any of the large banks, including Bank of America, worry warts.



                Remember back in 2009 when regulators required banks to raise what seemed like an unusually large amounts of capital (especially tangible common equity tier-1 capital)? This was done because government overseers were concerned of what could happen should government stimulus fail to stabilize the housing market and eventually push home prices higher. Currently, the large money center banks should have enough capital to weather another 2008, if necessary. This is one reason (the inability to securitize non-GSE-qualifying mortgages being another) that banks are reluctant to lend. They are hoarding capital. This is not to say that banks will be unaffected, poor earnings could be in their futures (for a variety of reasons), but corporate defaults large banks are an improbability at this time.

     Disclosure: Long C, BAC

                Investors in private label MBS, CDOs and SIVs have more to worry about than do corporate bond investors. It is not clear, in some cases, who actually owns a mortgage and who is just a servicer. There are situations in which banks may be foreclosing in propertied when the have no legal right to do so. This could be due to incomplete or incorrect documentation during the securitization process. If this can be proved, banks may have to take back at par the mortgage-backed vehicles currently held by investors. The problem is that many of these vehicles contain mortgages which have taken principal losses and will never be worth par no matter how long they are held. This is the main reason that suspending mark-to-market was not a permanent fix.


                Sure, it calmed investors’ fears as banks did not have to recognize unrealized losses, but now losses are being realized and many investors of finding that out the hard way. If one large group of investors can win a judgment versus an issuer, the flood gates could open for more litigation and lock up what is left of the mortgage market. That would practically kill the housing market. However, it is unlikely that these doomsdays scenarios play themselves out. It is more likely that foreclosures continue and many private label MBS issued from late 2005 through early 2008 will experience losses.


                Investors in debt (including preferreds) could be impacted by recent developments. If banks are force to absorb losses it is unlikely that they will exercise early capital event clauses afforded by the implementation of the Dodd bill. Instead banks could leave trust preferreds outstanding as long as they can be applied toward tier-1 capital. That means that trust preferreds could remain outstanding until at least 2013, if not longer.


                Many investors have become fearful of Countrywide bonds and preferreds. Investors need to understand that Countrywide debt and preferred securities are legal obligations of Bank of America. This is not the case with Merrill debt and trust preferreds. It is unlikely that BAC will default so Countrywide debt and preferreds should be alright, albeit a bit volatile. I would be more concerned about regional banks exposed to Florida and Nevada more than any of the large banks.



                Well there you have it. This is my take on the mortgage debacle as I see it at this time. If policymakers would only have permitted home prices to reset early in 2008 when mortgage credit was still available, real estate values probably would not have fallen as far as they have and regulators could have reigned in bad practices. Let’s hope that every one has learned from their mistakes.

    Disclosure: Long BAC, C
    Stocks: BAC, JPM, C
Back To Bernard Thomas' Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (2)
Track new comments
  • change is the only constant
    , contributor
    Comments (2283) | Send Message
    Insolvency is not a liquidity problem. If the banks are insolvent then the solution is haircut and liquidation this time, not Bailout II.


    Setting aside reserves for loan losses is not cash flow, and revenue from foreclosures fees is not cash flow either. The negative feedback loop means as long as housing does not recover then neither does banking. Bernake's efforts notwithstanding, the banking industry will be reset to reflect the value of housing, whether it likes it or not.
    16 Oct 2010, 05:55 AM Reply Like
  • Bernard Thomas
    , contributor
    Comments (70) | Send Message
    Author’s reply » Cash flow will not decline to default levels, at least ot among the large banks. That is pure hype. Large banks will use their huge cash positions (not simply liquidity, but actual cash) to get through this. Revenues will be down. They will never return to the thrilling days of the early 2000s, but they will be profitable, albeit less so and more conservative in their business models. Regional banks could go belly-up. Housing will be impaired until prices decline significantly further. U.S. growth will average around 2.0% for the next decade and unemp;oyment may not drop below 7% (maybe 8%) in that time.
    16 Oct 2010, 08:37 AM Reply Like
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers

Latest Comments

Most Commented
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.