[感谢]谁有权限访问华尔街日报网站的 - 求助成功区

0关注
2粉丝

硕士生

5%

还不是VIP/贵宾

-

0%

威望: 0 级
论坛币: 2347 个
通用积分: 0.0600
学术水平: 0 点
热心指数: 0 点
信用等级: 0 点
经验: 912 点
帖子: 84
精华: 0
在线时间: 99 小时
注册时间: 2007-7-5
最后登录: 2015-11-13

楼主

noperfect 发表于 2008-1-15 16:43:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群|倒序 |AI写论文

相似文件

换一批

是否 +2 论坛币

k人参与回答

经管之家送您一份

应届毕业生专属福利!

求职就业群

赵安豆老师微信：zhaoandou666

经管之家联合CDA

送您一个全额奖学金名额~ !

立即领取

感谢您参与论坛问题回答

经管之家送您两个论坛币！

+2 论坛币

Inquiry's Focus Broadens To Mortgage-Bond Insurers  <A href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120027584075287521.html">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120027584075287521.html</A>  
SEC Looks at Merrill Trading, In Search of 'Front-Running' <A href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120027943317587783.html">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120027943317587783.html</A>
History Lessons: Past Recessions Yield a Few Clues <A href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120027444331987485.html?mod=loomia&loomia_si=t0:a16:g2:r4:c0.131739">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120027444331987485.html?mod=loomia&loomia_si=t0:a16:g2:r4:c0.131739</A>
A Citi That Gets No Sleep <A href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119767945309730729.html?mod=sphere_ts">http://online.wsj.com/article/SB119767945309730729.html?mod=sphere_ts</A>
能否帮我取到这些文章，谢谢！
感谢楼下提供的帮助！
[此贴子已经被作者于2008-1-16 13:40:29编辑过]

扫码加我拉你入群

请注明：姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格，未注明则拒绝

分享0 收藏0 回帖

关键词：华尔街日报华尔街 Recessions recession insurers 访问权限感谢华尔街日报

11111111

111111111111111

附件: 你需要登录才可以下载或查看附件。没有帐号？我要注册 

使用道具举报

藤椅

bixuedanxin 发表于 2008-1-16 01:17:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

期待默多克对华报改革 不收费 就好了~

使用道具举报

板凳

lml000 发表于 2008-1-16 01:23:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

222222SEC Looks at Merrill Trading, In Search of 'Front-Running'By Kara Scannell456 words14 January 2008The Wall Street JournalC1English(Copyright (c) 2008, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)The Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating whether several current and former employees atMerrill Lynch & Co. improperly placed trades for the brokerage house's own account ahead of client orders,people familiar with the matter said.The probe is the latest twist in a look at information-sharing across Wall Street and heightens the regulatoryscrutiny into Merrill Lynch. The SEC already is investigating how the firm valued securities tied to homemortgages as well as the timeliness of those disclosures.Merrill Lynch is expected to report results this week, and analysts predict substantial write-downs, which willlikely draw the attention of regulators.The trading probe is a broad look at the relationship between big, institutional investors and the brokeragehouse. Specifically, one area of inquiry involves whether certain Merrill employees improperly stepped infront of orders placed by Fidelity Investments, the large mutual-fund operator, these people said. The periodunder scrutiny covers 2002 through 2005.Some of the traders no longer work at Merrill, one person said. A Merrill Lynch spokesman said the firmalways cooperates with regulatory inquiries and declined to comment further.The practice is known as "front-running," and previous regulatory scrutiny has resulted in regulatory finesand changes in industry practice. It gives an unfair advantage to traders because orders from big investmenthouses such as Fidelity often move stock prices.For example, if a trader received an order from an institutional investor to buy stock, the trader could thenstep ahead of the order to buy shares for the house account that could then be sold to Fidelity at a higherprice, locking in a profit.The investigation into Merrill's house trading is advanced, although it isn't clear whether the SEC will file acivil lawsuit.It comes amid increased scrutiny into whether there is a widespread leak of nonpublic information aroundtrade orders, merger announcements and corporate fund-raising from private investors.Last winter, the SEC and Justice Department announced charges against several former employees of UBSAG and Morgan Stanley involved in a complex insider-trading ring. Several people have pleaded guilty.That followed a "sweep" examination in January 2007, when the SEC asked almost a dozen brokeragehouses for trading and other data for a specified two-week period in September 2006.The goal was to determine whether information was being shared across firms amid concerns hedge fundswere receiving information about a broker's other clients, including mutual funds.The SEC probe into Merrill's trading didn't evolve from the sweep, one person familiar with the matter said.

使用道具举报

报纸

lml000 发表于 2008-1-16 01:28:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

3333333333Abreast of the MarketHistory Lessons: Past Recessions Yield a Few Clues --- Stocks Can Suffer Badly, As HappenedDuring '01, But Not So in 1990-91By Mark Gongloff and Scott Patterson943 words14 January 2008The Wall Street JournalC1English(Copyright (c) 2008, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)If the economy is heading into recession, as many on Wall Street fear, history may offer some clues aboutwhat that might mean for stocks.No two downturns are alike, but a look at market performance during previous recessions gives some cluesabout whether the market will have a relatively smooth rebound, meaning investors should be settingthemselves up for the recovery, or a long, tough slog.In many ways, today's situation is reminiscent of the recession of 1990-91, which featured a housing bustand piles of bad loans, which hurt banks. The Federal Reserve started cutting interest rates even before therecession began. The economic downturn was no day at the park, but it was fairly easy on stocks, whichrose during the recession and managed to avoid a bear market.In the 1970s and in 2001, recessions were marked by nasty bear markets. In both cases, investors ignoredthe risks that were building in the market, believing that high valuations were justified, be they on houses orstocks, because prices would continue rising. The earlier recession also featured soaring energy prices.In the more benign scenario, market performance is ugliest before and in the early days of a recession asinvestors panic about the effects of a downturn on earnings. In the three recessions between 1980 and1991, stocks turned positive before the recession ended, leading to runaway gains in the months after thedownturn. Stocks on the whole rose modestly during those recessions."The stock market is a powerful discounting mechanism, so by the time it becomes clear to everybody we'rein a recession, the market has factored in the ensuing recovery," said John Bollinger, president of BollingerCapital Management in Manhattan Beach, Calif.But that isn't always the case. Stocks fell during the recessions of the 1970s and 2001. The circumstancesof those downturns may be helpful when thinking about today's market.What happens to the economy -- how much it contracts and how high unemployment rises -- doesn'tnecessarily determine how the market performs. The 1973-75 recession is generally considered the worstsince World War II, and the market selloff associated with it was appropriately ugly. The S&P 500 fell about25% from the beginning to the end of the recession, as defined by the National Bureau of EconomicResearch, and the index fell about 48% during the entire bear market.The 2001 recession was caused by the double whammy of the popping of the technology-stock bubble anda major corporate-profit downturn. Though the labor-market downturn that followed was tough, the effect oneconomic growth was arguably quite mild.But the stock market's decline was prolonged and ugly. The S&P 500 fell about 8% during the recession andabout 49% during the entire bear market, the steepest decline since World War II. The S&P 500 was stilldown nearly 18% a year after the 2001 recession was over. Typically, stocks are higher 12 months after arecession.The fact that the chain of events stretched out longer than usual may have prolonged the market's agony.That could be a bad omen for today's market, given the slow unfolding of the housing debacle. But themarket's decline was largely caused by the tech-stock bubble that preceded it.That should give investors confidence, because the valuation of the market appears relatively inexpensive.2008 Factiva, Inc. All rights reserved.The price/earnings ratio for the S&P 500 today, when looking ahead to 2008 earnings, is just 13.8. Thatcould mean the index doesn't have much further to fall.The anomaly in the market over the past few years has been the strength of corporate profits. If profits returnto their long-term trend, then forecasts for earnings growth this year could be too optimistic. In that case, thelow P/E multiple would be misleading."The market is not as cheap as it looks," said Alec Young, equity market strategist at Standard & Poor's."People know that these [earnings] numbers are too high."The S&P 500 has fallen just 10% from its latest peak. A recession could drive it lower. But some industries,such as the financial sector, may already be priced for the worst. Industries that have benefited from strongglobal growth, such as basic materials and technology, could suffer much more if the U.S. economy'sproblems deepen.The economy "is not going to turn around on a dime; this could grind on for quite some time," said TimHayes, chief investment strategist at Ned Davis Research. One risk today is that a recession could make thehousing market worse, because job losses tend to be the biggest cause of mortgage defaults, so homeprices would keep falling. That would mean still more trouble for the home-building sector and for banksplagued by toxic subprime assets, delaying the recovery of their earnings.If a recession's cause does hurt stock performance, the 1973-75 downturn offers another ominousprecedent: It was driven mainly by an oil-price shock, and oil prices are near record highs once again.But crude's climb has taken much longer than it did 30-plus years ago, giving consumers time to adjust. Andthe economy relies much less on oil than it did then, so $100 oil likely will do less damage.<img src="http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/pqdweb?vinst=PROD&fmt=4&filenumber=1&clientid=12303&vname=PQD&RQT=309&did=1412221811&scaling=FULL&ts=1200417998&vtype=PQD&rqt=309" alt=""/>

使用道具举报

地板

lml000 发表于 2008-1-16 01:31:00 |只看作者 |坛友微信交流群

A Citi That Gets No Sleep --- Bank Must Move Fast To Shore Up Capital After More DowngradesBy David Reilly and David Enrich1,114 words15 December 2007The Wall Street JournalB1English(Copyright (c) 2007, Dow Jones & Company, Inc.)Citigroup Inc. seems like it is caught in a never-ending game of whack-a-mole: The second the bank knocksdown one problem, another pops up.On Friday, Moody's Investors Service downgraded Citigroup's long-term ratings, saying it expects continuedlosses related to mortgages and other complex securities. The action came a day after Citigroup resolvedlongstanding questions about troubled off-balance-sheet vehicles it sponsors.The downgrade shows that Chief Executive Vikram Pandit, who started his new position Tuesday, has littleroom to maneuver; he will have to quickly shore up the bank's capital, or the money it sets aside to ensure itcan withstand losses and make good on its obligations. The downgrade was an incremental lowering ofCitigroup's ratings. While it didn't signal any immediate crisis, it showed the increasing strain the bank'sfinances face from mounting losses springing from the housing downturn and ensuing credit crunch.The danger is that every time Mr. Pandit fixes one problem, the bank's balance sheet could spring anotherleak. Citigroup could quickly find itself in a capital squeeze; additional losses eat into capital even asdowngrades of its assets force the bank to set aside more money to meet regulatory requirements.This pressure could push Mr. Pandit to cut the bank's generous dividend. The $2.16-a-share annual payoutcosts the bank $10.8 billion a year, money which could go a long way towards shoring up capital. Citigroup's stock Friday fell 31 cents, or 1%, to $30.70, just above its five-year low. The shares yield slightly less than7%.A Citigroup spokeswoman declined to comment. In recent weeks, Citigroup has pledged to uphold thedividend. However, unlike earlier announcements in which it pledged to support the dividend, Citigroup'sstatement Thursday on its off-balance-sheet vehicles, known as structured investment vehicles, or SIVs,contained no mention of the payout.Generally investors hate a dividend cut, but at this point, they might not howl too loudly. If it happens, "So beit," said Wendell Perkins, chief investment officer and portfolio manager at Optique Capital ManagementInc., which owns Citigroup stock. In fact, a dividend cut could boost the stock because investors maybelieve the bank is finally pulling out of its tailspin, he added.Whether Citigroup can avoid such drastic action depends on how much money it will have to raise incoming months to rebuild its capital cushion. CIBC analyst Meredith Whitney estimates the bank will need toraise $30 billion and will have little choice but to cut the dividend -- and do even more. She and otheranalysts expect Citigroup will have to raise additional capital from investors beyond the $7.5 billion inconvertible bonds it recently sold to Abu Dhabi's investment arm and sell assets.The bank's weakness is reflected in its Tier 1 ratio, which measures a bank's ability to absorb losses andmeet obligations by comparing tangible equity to assets graded by the amount of risk they carry. That keymetric dropped to 7.3% at the end of September. While that is above the 6% level regulators require for abank to be deemed "well capitalized," it is below Citigroup's own internal target of 7.5% and the ratios atother major banks.Citigroup says it wants to rebuild that ratio by the middle of next year. But some analysts think it is likely tokeep sliding in the fourth quarter, possibly to below 7%.But the Tier 1 ratio may actually be a bright spot for Citigroup. The bank's leverage ratio, a measure of Tier1 capital to average total consolidated assets -- and an indicator of a bank's ability to absorb losses -- isshowing greater stress. At the end of September, this ratio was 4.3%. Banks must typically maintain at leasta 5% leverage ratio, although Citigroup received a waiver and must stay above 4%. If Citigroup's ratio falls2008 Factiva, Inc. All rights reserved.below that lower bar, the bank could have problems with regulators." Citigroup has the lowest leverage ratio of any large bank," said Christopher Whalen, a managing director atInstitutional Risk Analytics. But because default rates on some kinds of loans at Citigroup tend to be higherthan at peers, "they arguably need more capital than banks of equal size," he added.And things may get worse before they get better. In cutting Citigroup's ratings Friday, Moody's said itexpects the bank to face significant charges in 2008 because of its holdings of mortgage-related securities.Sean Jones, the Moody's analyst who follows Citigroup, said he expects the bank to face write-downs onits collateralized-debt-obligation assets that exceed the $8 billion to $11 billion loss the bank already hasforecast on this debt for the fourth quarter.Moody's also warned that the bank could face further downgrades if it doesn't quickly get its problems inhand. If that happened, Citigroup could face higher borrowing costs and its traders could be forced to put upadditional capital when doing business with other firms, said Edward Grebeck, who runs financial advisoryfirm Tempus Advisors.Beyond losses, the bank's capital ratios could come under pressure because of outstanding pledges to loanmoney to companies and other institutions. Citigroup faces "the risk of further involuntary asset growth" ascompanies tap existing credit lines, said John McDonald, an analyst at Banc of America Securities. Thatcould tie up more of the bank's balance sheet, making it difficult for it to increases lending and profit.Finally, Citigroup could see capital ratios weaken further as credit-ratings firms downgrade debt that it isholding, such as residential mortgage-backed securities. That is because banks have to set aside capitalbased on the risk level of an asset, which is determined by its ratings."As so many assets have been downgraded by the rating agencies in this past fourth quarter, more assetson bank balance sheets require greater amounts of capital," CIBC's Ms. Whitney said in a report Friday. ForCitigroup, "this is particularly challenging as it has a precariously low capital base going into the fourthquarter."That could also spell trouble in terms of the $49 billion in SIV assets Citigroup is bringing onto its books,should those get downgraded. A change in the SIV assets' risk weighting "could translate into yet anothercapital challenge," Ms Whitney's report said.<img src="http://proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.lib.ucalgary.ca/pqdweb?vinst=PROD&fmt=4&filenumber=1&clientid=12303&vname=PQD&RQT=309&did=1398973331&scaling=FULL&ts=1200418205&vtype=PQD&rqt=309" alt=""/>

使用道具举报