Banks Borrow Nearly €500 billion

Yesterday there were speculations all day long as to how big the new long term refinancing operation (LTRO) of the ECB would become. As the day wore on, the estimates tended to grow ever larger. We thought that the upper and of the seemingly more daring estimates would likely be hit and that is exactly what has happened. Regarding our thought process in connection with the ECB's policy, we have told our readers from the very day the new easing measures were announced that they should not be underestimated. We have frequently returned to the subject in recent days as the situation has evolved, noting that there was apparently an even bigger inflationary push in the works than hitherto thought. Note here that today's LTRO is only the first of two such operations and that in addition, banks will be able to pledge various other normally difficult to market credit claims with their national central banks in the euro system. As one friend of ours remarked in conversations in recent days (paraphrasing), 'this will significantly support the banks and sovereigns in those countries where the primary vector of contagion is from the banks to the sovereign' –  such as is for instance the case in Spain.  Readers may recall that we have since last year always stressed that in Spain, the banking system and the cost of cleaning it up in the middle of a depression presents an enormous problem for the government.

Regarding today's LTRO, let us first look at a summary from Bloomberg:

The Frankfurt-based ECB awarded 489 billion euros ($645 billion) in 1,134-day loans, the most ever in a single operation and more than economists’ median estimate of 293 billion euros in a Bloomberg News survey. The ECB said 523 banks asked for the funds, which will be lent at the average of its benchmark rate  – currently 1 percent – over the period of the loans. They start tomorrow.

“It was obviously an offer the banks could not refuse,” said Laurent Fransolet, head of fixed income strategy at Barclays Capital in London. “It shows the ECB is not out of ammunition and it gives banks security on liquidity for a few years. On the other hand it means banks will rely on the ECB for longer.”


(emphasis added)

Why anyone thought the banks would refuse a big pile of free money is beyond us. After all, Mario Draghi specifically said that 'no stigma' would be attached to such borrowing. This is code for: 'If you borrow from this facility, it will not invite regulatory scrutiny of your institution'.

It shouldn't be too difficult to invest money one gets at 1% at a profit, even in today's more risky world in which so-called 'risk-free' interest rates have plunged. In addition, as we have pointed out previously, it is an undeniable fact that the fates of banks and governments are in any case tied together for better or worse – and they are lately becoming even more so. Yesterday we were once again discussing with a number of friends how probable it was that the 'Sarko-Corzine trade' as it has been named would be financed with the LTRO's.

At issue is the question whether the banks will be willing to reinvest some of the proceeds from the LTRO's in the 'sovereign debt carry trade' in the euro area, thereby simultaneously making a large spread profit, while also helping sovereign bond yields to come down, which in turn will lead to less stringent capital demands on the part of the EBA. This latter point, along with Sarkozy's remarks, is among the dots we are trying to connect. In the meantime (as you will see further below), even more evidence has appeared that points in this direction, although a number of significant counter-arguments remain as well. In short, the question is, will the Ponzi game resume and perhaps even grow. Here is a  brief summary of our thinking on the matter:

“One should not underestimate the willingness of banks to play the Ponzi with free money. A fractionally reserved system is after all at all times on the very edge of insolvency. The euro area's especially so – of € 3.92 trillion in sight deposits, only € 211 billion were actually covered with standard money before the most recent halving of reserve requirements. In theory, if more than 4.6% of depositors were to exercise their legal claims to standard money, the banking system would become instantly unable to pay. We say 'in theory' because it is of course backstopped by the central bank –  as we can in fact once again see in the recent balance sheet explosion.

Anyway, why would a system that is constituted like that refuse to gamble with free money? It is the very essence of its business.”


In the Western European legal tradition, this was not always the case. In antiquity a sharp legal distinction between deposit banking and loan banking was made, which is precisely as it should be. As an interesting aside, it was canonical law against usury during medieval times that actually helped to pave the legal way for fractional reserves via the 'depositum confessatum' , as J.H. De Soto highlights in his excellent book 'Money, Bank Credit and Economic Cycles' [we refer readers to our series on fractional reserve banking for details – Part 1, Part 2 and Part 3].

In brief , the depositum confessatum was a mutuum contract, this is to say a savings deposit with a fixed term and hence eligible to earn interest. However, since interest payments were circumscribed by usury laws, banks resorted to a trick: the savings deposits were 'masquerading' as sight deposits (essentially the exact opposite of what happens today with sweeps) that officially paid no interest. Instead, the banks would pay a fine when the deposit matured, by pretending that they could not immediately pay it on demand.  This was in accordance with the laws handed down by the preeminent legal scholars of antiquity, which stipulated that if a banker was found not to have a customer deposit 100% reserved by dint of his inability to pay on demand, he had to pay a fine to his client in addition to the money claim.

You can see where this is going: once the depositum confessatum became a widespread method of circumventing usury laws, later jurists were easily convinced that a sight deposit in fact represented a 'loan to the bank' and not a bailment contract, i.e. a contract for warehousing and safe-keeping. This view serves to this day as the legal basis for fractional reserve banking. As a matter of fact, it was an ex-post legalization of what had previously been regarded as a fraudulent practice.

Not surprisingly, the middle ages were host to a number of banking crises that regularly wiped out large percentages of the banking system in deflationary collapses when these Ponzi schemes blew up (this was obviously prior to central banking and the ability to create literally unlimited amounts of money from thin air).

When the Medici Bank went under in the late 15th century, it held reserves equal to 5% of its deposits. This was an absolutely stunning extreme even for that particular boom-bust sequence, but still better than the reserves of the euro area banking system as a whole today!

Today the banking system has become a moloch that has flagrantly over-traded its capital, is constantly on the verge of collapse and requires ever accelerating inflation to keep its head above water.

The chart below shows a somewhat longer term view of the ECB's balance sheet (the two crises can be clearly identified) – still pre-LTRO as it were. We will provide the post LTRO chart as soon as is practicable:



Via Scott Barber from Reuters, a  chart of the evolution of the ECB's balance sheet since the year 2000. The two liquidity/solvency crises are clearly discernible. This chart was made yesterday, so the effects of today's LTRO are not yet visible – click chart for better resolution.



Is The Ponzi Game Now On?

Still, in spite of everything we have pointed out above and in previous missives on the subject, one can of course not be absolutely certain that the euro area banks will now use these fresh funds to engage in 'QE though the backdoor'. Several noteworthy arguments have been forwarded in opposition to this view, such as for instance the fact that banks have lately been rewarded by the stock market for cutting their euro area sovereign debt exposure down. Moreover, since they are experiencing a funding squeeze and are forced to raise more capital, they may use the fresh long term funding mainly to avoid having to sell profitable assets, i.e. as a means to slow down the deleveraging process. All these arguments have undoubtedly merit.

Certainly no-one is forcing the banks to buy more sovereign debt, although we suspect that there is a lot of behind-the-scenes suasion going on, in addition to the broad hints that politicians have made in public, as e.g. those by the 'pro QE' French president Sarkozy. In politics it is always important to read between the lines and separate the meaningless chatter from the handful of things that actually count – nothing happens by coincidence.

Consider how the Sarkozy-Merkel dispute over the ECB's role in the sovereign debt crisis was resolved: Sarkozy agreed to simply 'back down' and no longer mention his demands in public, so as to 'preserve the independence of the ECB'. What course this independent supra-national government agency then actually embarks on is up to its governing council, but the monetary bureaucrats surely can take a hint as well as anybody. Besides, we feel fairly certain that the issue was discussed with them as well. From the point of view of the ECB, the biggest danger is always that its management of 'inflation expectations' may eventually run into problems. Therefore it regards it as extremely important to keep up the impression of independence, since this is presumed to reassure economic actors in the euro area that the vaunted 'price stability' policy is not in danger due to the whims and needs of over-indebted governments.

In short, like every modern central bank, the ECB wants to be free to inflate as much as is possible without people noticing, so the speed and degree to which the purchasing power of the money it issues declines is high up on its list of priorities. Inflation of the money supply can very quickly become quite counterproductive from the point of view of the interventionist if and when the markets react negatively to repeated deployments of the printing press.

Note that the ECB has frequently stressed that it wants to keep bank credit available to 'households and companies' in the euro area  – it never mentioned that the banks should buy sovereign debt. Alas, it seems fairly certain that both objectives are part of the plan. Consider now that in Qu.1 of 2012, some € 530 billion in bank and sovereign bond will mature and require rolling over. This seemed an extremely daunting prospect hitherto. Following the LTRO, it is far less so.

Further from Bloomberg's summary:

Barclays estimates the loans will inject 193 billion euros of new money into the system, with 296 billion euros accounted for by maturing loans. The ECB also lent banks $33 billion for 14 days in a regular dollar offering, up from $5.1 billion a week ago, and 29.7 billion euros for 98 days.

The euro jumped half a cent to $1.3198 before slumping to $1.3080 at noon in Frankfurt. Spanish two-year notes extended a decline, snapping an eight-day gain and sending yields seven basis points higher to 3.42 percent. Italian notes also declined, pushing the yield nine basis points higher to 5.06 percent.

Italian and Spanish government bond yields have dropped since the ECB announced the loans on Dec. 8 as banks buy the securities to use them as collateral. French President Nicolas Sarkozy has suggested banks could use the loans to buy even more government debt.

“What the ECB wants is that the funds be used by banks to keep handing out loans,” said Michael Schubert, an economist at Commerzbank AG in Frankfurt. “But there’s a second argument, which is to do carry trades by borrowing on the cheap at the ECB and buying sovereign bonds. We don’t know what the banks are using the money for.”


(emphasis added)

Nearly €200 billion in additional liquidity is quite a lot. Consider that the sovereign borrowing requirements frequently cited are the gross, not the net amounts. Most of the borrowing is to roll over maturing debt, so around the time bond auctions occur, there is also an inflow from the repayment of maturing debt. In light of this, the € 200 billion in excess liquidity created by LTRO number one (a second operation is scheduled for February next year) is quite a big deal. In fact it is almost equal to the amount of unsecured bank bonds maturing in the first quarter (an estimated € 230 billion). It also seems unlikely that the banks won't find a single buyer when they issue bonds early next year, especially if the crisis pauses for a while.

As Bloomberg continues in this context:

“ECB Vice President Vitor Constancio in a Dec. 19 interview predicted “significant” demand for the loans as banks face “very high refinancing needs early next year.”  Some 230 billion euros of bank bonds mature in the first quarter of 2012 alone, ECB President Mario Draghi told the European Parliament this week.

“Banks represent about 80 percent of lending to the euro area,” Draghi said. “The banking channel is crucial to the supply of credit.” He predicted banks will experience “very significant funding constraints” for the “whole” of 2012.  Banks from the euro region need to refinance 35 percent more debt next year than they did this year, according to a Bank of England study. Lenders have more than 600 billion euros of debt maturing in 2012, around three quarters of which is unsecured, the study says.

The ECB is focusing on greasing the banking system to fight the debt crisis as it resists calls to increase its bond purchases to reduce governments’ borrowing costs. Today’s lending exceeded the 442 billion euros awarded in the ECB’s inaugural 12-month loan in 2009. The central bank will offer a second three-year loan in February and borrowers have the option of repaying the funds after a year.

“It’s very significant and very helpful for the banks,” Jacques Cailloux, chief European economist at Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc in London, told Bloomberg Television. “But it’s not going to bring about a turning point in this crisis.”


(emphasis added)

We would certainly agree with Mr. Cailloux that this does not represent a true 'turning point' in the crisis. It should be clear that the main effect will be to buy a little bit more time. The fundamental problems besetting the euro area can ultimately not be resolved by revving up the printing press. Solvency and liquidity are two quite distinct issues, but as we know, banks are very sophisticated when it comes to 'extend and pretend' games.

What it does represent is the chance for a pause in the crisis, i.e., it gives everybody more time to dig an even bigger hole. What is also noteworthy about all this is that it confirms something we have often stressed: the root of the current crisis is in fact the credit expansion and boom engendered by the fractionally reserved banking system prior to the 2008 caesura. The crisis goes well beyond a mere sovereign debt crisis in that sense – it is more profoundly systemic in nature and concerns the monetary system itself. Concurrently with the liquidation of malinvested capital, the unsound credit supporting these malinvestments needs to be liquidated as well. This is precisely the process the ECB's latest measures attempt to arrest or at least delay.



A chart showing the inverse of the Markit i-Traxx subordinated bank CDS index vs. the euro area bank stocks index. The prices of bank stocks are closely correlated with market perceptions about default risk – click chart for better resolution.



A long term chart of the growth in non-performing loans in the Spanish banking system via a recent research report by BNP – in spite of Spain's banks being past masters at hiding their losses, these NPLs have begun to climb sharply. Most of them are mortgages and loans to real estate developers.



Spain's deposit growth has turned negative as a result of bank credit growth turning negative. Spain's banks get an ever larger percentage of their funding from the ECB these days.



Is is clear from the above that Spain's banks – and this goes of course for the banks in all the other 'PIIGS' nations too, even though the details of their problems differ from case to case  – should be more concerned with getting their leverage down and generally getting their house in order rather than embarking on yet another carry trade. And yet, from the point of view of the banks, things may look a bit different. As noted before, the fate of banks and their sovereigns is in any event closely intertwined. A bank that may one day require a government bailout will go under anyway if the government debt crisis worsens further. So it has actually nothing to lose by adding to its holdings of bonds issued by said government. They will both sink or swim together no matter what.

A new story has emerged yesterday that illustrates what actions governments and banks in the euro area are taking behind the scenes to ease the bank funding crisis. It should be clear that one of the unstated objectives of these activities is to free up money for the purpose of banks adding to their sovereign debt holdings. While these are all piecemeal actions, they certainly tend to cement the interconnectedness between banks and governments even further.

As the WSJ reports:

“Governments in Europe are tying themselves in knots to prop up their banks, desperate to blunt the cost and embarrassment of a fresh wave of taxpayer-funded bailouts.

In Italy, for example, the government is encouraging banks to buy public properties that the banks then can use to borrow money. As part of a broader deficit-reduction program in Portugal, the government essentially is borrowing money from bank pension funds and could use some of the funds to help state-owned companies repay bank loans.  Governments in Germany and Spain also are using unorthodox measures to support their ailing banks.

The unusual moves come as euro-zone countries are under growing pressure to reel in soaring borrowing costs by showing investors in government bonds that their budgets are under control. In addition, bank bailouts are politically toxic, especially for governments that have sought to reassure markets about the health of their banking systems. Some economists say such moves aren't an adequate substitute for a broader rescue package that would include recapitalizing the lenders and helping them issue new debt.”


A provision tucked into the Italian government's budget law last month is designed to defuse some of those pressures. It allows the banks to use their government bonds to purchase army barracks, office buildings and other state-owned real estate that the government has been trying to sell.  The government would then lease the properties back from their new owners. And the banks can package the income-producing properties into asset-backed securities, which can be pledged as collateral with the ECB in exchange for loans, analysts say.

Italy's real-estate-for-sovereign-bonds maneuver also gives a boost to the government. Not only can it rid itself of unwanted properties, but the government also will be able to retire the bonds that banks use to purchase the real estate—thereby reducing Italy's heavy debt load.”


(emphasis added)

The article brings several more examples illustrating the maneuvers in other countries as well (such as e.g. the 'redirection' of pension funds by Portugal's government), but the point remains that we can see here that the various euro area governments and their banks are closely cooperating in an attempt to defuse the pressures on both the bank funding issue and the sovereign debt crisis. The banks are probably being told by their governments 'if you want our help, you better show up when there's a bond auction'.



Backdoor bank bailout, Italian style: how to offload government buildings on the ECB's balance sheet  and thereby ease both bank funding pressures and create a more favorable supply-demand situation for the government's debt – click chart for better resolution.



As Reuters reported yesterday, Italian banks are also using state guarantees for their own bonds to make them presentable as ECB collateral.

“More than 10 Italian banks, including major lenders, are looking to apply for the European Central Bank's new ultra-cheap three-year loans by using state-guaranteed bonds as collateral, a source close the situation told Reuters on Tuesday.

A second source confirmed all the main Italian banks had requested state guarantees for bank bonds under a new scheme -launched by Italy's emergency government – aimed at lowering funding costs for lenders.-

"There has been interest in state-guaranteed bonds. There have been requests by more than 10 banks that were approved. Banks are doing this … to present it as collateral for the ECB loans," one of the sources said.”


The ECB hopes its first ever limit-free, ultra-cheap and longer funding will help bolster trust in banks, ease the threat of a credit crunch and tempt banks to buy Italian and Spanish debt.”


(emphasis added)

Now, the ECB never said that it wants to 'tempt banks to buy Italian and Spanish debt', but who can doubt in view of all these machinations that 'QE through the backdoor' is in fact a major goal?


The Counter-arguments

The big question is though whether it will actually work. There was an extensive discussion of the counter-arguments at the FT's Alphaville blog, which highlights all the perceived problems with the 'carry trade' idea. See: 'The carry trade and the goldilocks LTRO'.

A few pertinent quotes:

“The FT has already reported (pdf) on how hesitant banks are about buying ever more sovereign debt. In fact they outright dumped €65bn of bonds in just nine months. Hopes that banks would hold the hand of the sovereigns that back them continue to dim, as the Sarko carry-trade looks increasingly less likely in advance of this Wednesday’s offer of cheap 3-year ECB financing.”

The presumption that banks are going to use the 3-year Long Term Refinancing Operation (LTRO) to buy sovereign bonds comes not just from the dreams of certain politicians, but also from the observation that yields at the short end of peripheral curves have come in dramatically.

Is this the result of banks buying up the high yielding bonds that they will soon be able to fund exceptionally cheaply?


Not so much, say the analysts at SocGen in their Rates Strategy daily this Monday. There are many factors at play, and true, one of them may be the anticipation of banks putting on carry trades, but the expectations may not transform into reality.

For one thing, banks are going to have to find a way to fund their existing asset holdings — to the extent that they don’t deleverage themselves into nothingness, that is — and a good portion of the current funding for them will roll off in 2012. SocGen points out that for eurozone banks in 2012, €250bn of senior unsecured bank bonds will mature, along with €83bn of government guaranteed debt, plus €19bn of subordinated debt.

Seeing as the unsecured market is somewhere between frozen and inaccessibly expensive, the most relevant candidate for the replacement of that debt is reckoned to be around €185bn of covered bond issuance, a figure which the analysts acknowledge may well be a bit on the high side (though at least it will be supported by another ECB programme to specifically prop up that market).

The rest of the funding needs to come from somewhere. And, well, the ECB is offering…”


(emphasis added)

We think that this perhaps underestimates the degree to which governments can and will exert pressure on the banks. When all the euro area  governments are extending a helping hand to the banks, one must assume this doesn't come for free.

Nevertheless, the fact remains that the commercial banks can not be forced to buy more sovereign debt and that the trend has lately been for them to offload it. Moreover, sovereign risk remains extremely high, and the probability of a break-up of the euro area remains very high as well. In all likelihood sovereign debt holdings will shift within the euro area banking system, with domestic concentration increasing.

In the final analysis, all these contortions are an attempt to con the markets one more time. The banks face considerable uncertainty when engaging in this carry trade – if the sovereign debt crisis flares up again, their losses will increase. Nevertheless, the mountain of liquidity unleashed by the ECB will definitely have an effect on prices somewhere in the economy. Our best guess at this point in time would be that it buys some time and leads to another brief lull in the crisis. It will be very telling in this context how the markets react to the next slew of  downgrades of various sovereigns in the euro area.



More Ratings Warnings – The EFSF Comes Under Scrutiny


Fitch has just released a warning on the credit rating of the euro-area's bailout fund, the EFSF. This warning must be put into context: it would make no sense to issue it unless the probability was high that Fitch will eventually dispense a number of sovereign downgrades, with France high up on the list of candidates.

As the WSJ reports:

“The triple-A debt rating of Europe's temporary bailout fund largely depends on France and Germany retaining their triple-A status, ratings agency Fitch warned Tuesday, adding that the agency's revision last week of its outlook on France to negative implies that the fund is at a greater risk of a downgrade.

"We affirmed France's triple-A status but warned that there is a slightly greater than 50% chance of a downgrade within the next year or two. This is therefore also the case for the triple-A ratings assigned to the [European Financial Stability Facility's] debt issues, unless additional credit enhancement mechanisms are introduced," Fitch said.

Fitch's comments follow a warning by Standard & Poor's Corp., which said Dec. 6 that it could strip the EFSF of its triple-A rating by up to two notches, if any of the similarly rated countries that guarantee the fund were also downgraded.

The triple-A ratings assigned to EFSF debt issues rely on the €726 billion ($944 billion) of irrevocable and unconditional guarantees provided by the euro-zone states, and on the conservative guidelines the EFSF sets itself regarding debt management and liquidity risk, Fitch said.

France and Germany provide €369.6 billion—or more than 80%—of the guarantees and over-guarantees to the bailout fund.  While such warnings from ratings firms have to some extent been expected, they have created much uncertainty, with market participants awaiting further clarification.


France is the most exposed of the triple-A countries in the euro zone to the currency bloc's deepening sovereign-debt crisis. It provides €158.5 billion of guarantees as well as over-guarantees to the EFSF guarantee pool under the framework agreement, Fitch said.”


(emphasis added)

It is of course no big surprise that the EFSF  finally comes under more scrutiny by the rating agencies. We believe that the ratings of France and the EFSF harbor great potential to become the next  'crisis trigger'.

One would normally assume that the markets have already discounted a coming downgrade of France's government debt and to some extent this is true: both CDS spreads and OAT yields indicate a certain degree of discounting  has indeed taken place. However, recent experience indicates that this discounting is rarely complete. Usually we see both the credit markets and so-called 'risk asset' markets take an additional pounding when a significant new downgrade is issued, even if it was widely 'expected'. This should be especially true in this particular case, where the EFSF would become subject of an automatic downgrade in the wake of a downgrade of France. For the moment, Fitch at least has given France more time, but it is not yet certain whether Standard & Poors will be similarly generous.

In summary, we would expect the ECB's LTRO's to create a lull in the crisis, but  it won't help to actually overcome it. The highly likely lowering of the credit rating of France and by implication of the EFSF,  are high up on our list of the next potential crisis triggers, but we will of course have to wait and see how the markets actually react when the time comes.





Below is a long term chart of US housing starts published by Reuters  yesterday. This shows how little the recent improvement in housing starts  amounts to in the longer term context. Still, it does appear as though housing starts are trying to put in at least a short to medium term bottom. Overall the performance is still so bad though that the recent improvement will probably not suffice to dissuade the new,  even more 'dovish' incarnation of the FOMC from embarking on another round of MBS monetization next year.



US housing starts: the recent improvement in the longer term context – click chart for better resolution.






Charts by: Bloomberg, Reuters, BNP, WSJ




Emigrate While You Can... Learn More




Dear Readers!

You may have noticed that our so-called “semiannual” funding drive, which started sometime in the summer if memory serves, has seamlessly segued into the winter. In fact, the year is almost over! We assure you this is not merely evidence of our chutzpa; rather, it is indicative of the fact that ad income still needs to be supplemented in order to support upkeep of the site. Naturally, the traditional benefits that can be spontaneously triggered by donations to this site remain operative regardless of the season - ranging from a boost to general well-being/happiness (inter alia featuring improved sleep & appetite), children including you in their songs, up to the likely allotment of privileges in the afterlife, etc., etc., but the Christmas season is probably an especially propitious time to cross our palms with silver. A special thank you to all readers who have already chipped in, your generosity is greatly appreciated. Regardless of that, we are honored by everybody's readership and hope we have managed to add a little value to your life.


Bitcoin address: 12vB2LeWQNjWh59tyfWw23ySqJ9kTfJifA


21 Responses to “The ECB’s LTRO – A Giant Inflationary Push”

  • Andyc:


    and please do not post anymore articles about how the 1%ers especially in regard to finance….create prosperity for US or pay OUR taxes.

    Entrepreneurs maybe you have a case, these guys?


    : )

    We pay for THEM, same in Europe


  • Andyc:

    They will “invest” this money in the exact same shite that required this bailout in the first place.

    Euro debt!

    Its yielding a high return and the next bailout will surely come when it once again collapses.

    It is ALL one huge circle jerk of moral hazard trading now.

    I would have my doubts about the above statement but after seeing what Corzine “invested” in……..????

    The poor slob missed out on his “bazooka bet” by less than 2 months.

    The IB welfare babies fail again.

    • I don’t think so Andy. They are going to hold onto this credit to roll their insolvent corporate debt. They bought the crap to put up for the loan in the first place. They might as well have bought it, they were stuck with it and few of them had a way out of rolling their bonds at any decent price.

      • Andyc:


        By corporate debt you mean the banks own debt?

        again circular…….

        : )

        these frigging guys!

        • That is exactly what I believe Andy and what I have been able to deduce from what I have read in the last couple of days. They are buying back their own debt. Why not? If they can’t roll this crap, they are faced with the credit crunch from hell. That is what I mean that the ECB killed two birds with one stone. The banks bought the PIGS debt and put it with the ECB for cash to cover their own debts. The banks and the governments are in a join trap. They need each other to keep going. The depositors will get the bill

    • We will have to wait and see what they actually do with the money, but it does make the marketing of euro area sovereign debt easier even if it is only used to alleviate the need for banks to seek replacements for the unsecured funding maturing in the first quarter.

  • After reading this, I feel like my guess yesterday was close to right on. Question is, what is the ECB doing here? To me it appears they are giving banks a reason to participate in rolling the bad sovereign debt by giving them a place to store it in return for debit side cash. This cash will allow for the redemption of expiring bonds, which were definitely doomed to create a hell of a credit crunch. Short term, they kill 2 birds with one stone.

    Longer term, what about the solvency issue? This appears to be a short term ring fencing of the debt rolling problem, but the banking system is going to have to do something about their solvency issues. I’m not sure the ECB or Basel can afford to pussy foot around with this issue and have to insist these banks raise capital. It doesn’t appear the various EU countries can afford to recap the banks themselves or they will be right in the midst of this boiling stew again soon. Where the debit side cash ends up (I have to make a distinction because debit side bank cash is different than the credit side) is another matter. Who owns the bonds that are being rolled? If it is other banks, that is quite different than if it is individuals, who will be apt to either hoard the money or put it into something else. I doubt any of these entities, once they get their money back are ready to jump into the same solvency trap from which they just escaped.

    • A lot of the unsecured bank debt is e.g. held in mutual funds the banks in Europe are marketing to their retail clients. A lot of it has also ended up on the ECB’s balance sheet methinks.
      Agreed on the solvency issue – it can not be solved this way. All that this does is to buy more time – and very likely it will shift some of the losses to the population at large, depending on how big the follow-on effect on money supply growth will turn out to be.

      • The population is what owes the banks and already can’t pay more, so they are merely shifting what debt is bad. Your responses below made me think of something. As long as the excess is going to a region of stability, there won’t be much inflation. By this, I mean the LTRO is going mainly to large banks, which have had to borrow in the secondary market to balance their books. They are in essense borrowing the excess of their operations back from the market. The LTRO allows them to temporarily sell assets to repay these debts. This represents money the other banks already had and already owe. I think the TBTF banks will have problems finding funds on the secondary markets for a long time to come.

        Banking solvency works on a closed loop and if the loop opens, someone is insolvent. In a cashless society, the loop would be closed, which is why I don’t particularly care for debit cards.

  • ab initio:

    When the crisis actions move to the forex markets and when forex drives credit markets then we should know that we are in the next phase of the unraveling of the contemporary leveraged financial architecture.

    Since the current phase is primarily about credit risk – in nominal terms money printing seems to do the trick of kicking the can down the road. Liquidity seems to trump solvency. When further money printing causes the forex markets to become unglued is a key factor to pay attention. Until then central banks can keep expanding their balance sheet.

    • Liquidity merely hides insolvency. The insolvency can’t be fixed and the liabilities are still there.

    • I agree in principle, but the question is, which forex relationship should one watch? After all the major central banks are all engaging in some or other form of ‘QE’ (the Fed will surely initiate ‘QE3’ in due time, especially if the stock market should fall). The best thing to watch may actually be gold, and the gold futures curve. A relatively flat gold futures curve is normal when interest rates are at near zero, but it would be a strong warning if the curve were to invert, i.e. go into backwardation.

  • Greenhead:

    The biggest thing I see is the collusion between govt and banks to fund the ongoing programs that make most people think govt is doing something. Pensions, bridges, subsidies, monuments, govt union jobs and so on. The ongoing need for funds above and beyond what can be funded by taxpayers requires access to capital markets.

    At some point, it can’t work anymore but folks continue to demand more and more and the politicos can’t say no, we can’t afford more. To stay in power they then borrow to fund the promises until they can’t anymore.

    What is really happening is European taxpayers and citizens are being asked to fund the excesses not only of the piigs but also the other countries as well. How? By higher taxes and/or inflation depending on how far and how deep the ECB LTRO goes.

  • Eddy:

    There is another effect that have received little atention about this LTRO: interbank lending rates have been falling since this LTRO was announced, and it looks logical that the more the ECB prints, the lower Euribor rates will go. In Spain most loans are variable rate…referenced to 1-year euribor…so an unexpected consequence of ECB printing huge amounts of money is that banks will earn less money for their loans. This is the Japanese curse.

  • 4horsemen:

    Pater – there can be no question these days that I wake every morning and (attempt to) sleep every night with a pit of anxiety in my stomach. As much as I agree with your prognostications, my disdain for the incessant meddling and my fear for my own future as a result are overwhelming…

    I apologize for my ignorance here, but could you explain to me briefly how this LTRO operation is inflationary? As I understand it, there is no money printing involved so where would the increase in money supply come from to warrant “massive inflation?”

    • It is not inflationary as long as the funds are held as excess reserves with the ECB. Alas, in case the banks decide to use the funds to finance credit to governments or the private sector (the latter is less likely, as credit demand is very subdued), then the money will ‘leak out’ into the economy. Since this has happened on occasion of the 2009 LTRO, we must be alive to the possibility of it happening again.

  • Outlaw:

    I think the concerns over the Euro-area funding issues for early 2012 are overblown. National governments and the ECB will probably figure out a way to kick that can one more time.

    The 3-year LTRO’s appear to have blown up some shorts but little else, however. A sovereign debt carry trade big enough to get an intermediate rally in PIIGS bonds is unlikely when only two 3-year LTRO offerings are being made. I’ve only seen sizable carry trade rallies when the liquidity window is open 24/7 and the trade can be closed out easily without breaking the terms of the originating loan.

    We’ll see. The incentives to dump PIIGS bonds are very real and difficult to ignore, whereas the incentives to add to these positions relies on intuiting the dialogue between various banks and governments. Overall it looks like yet another half-baked “solution” out of the eurozone.

    • I agree with this assessment – we can not know with certainty what has been discussed behind the scenes, but in all likelihood a way to kick the can down the road one more time has been devised. Whether it will work remains to be seen, and how the money supply will be affected in early 2012 will be very informative in this regard.

  • rodney:

    Even though €500 bn have been created out of thin air, the inflationary push is much larger if banks decide to use the new money out of thin air to buy sovereign debt.

    If it happens, does it have the potential to kick start a new cycle of credit expansion in the eurozone? Could we see a new bull market in European stocks?

    • If the measures do succeed in expanding the money supply, then I would expect certain – but not necessarily all – European stock markets to rally. It depends a bit on the – unmeasurable – state of the pool of real funding. In countries where the pool of real funding is under pressure, the likelihood of a stock market rally seems less pronounced, even in the event of a money supply expansion. The divergences we have seen in various markets will probably persist, although it is possible that the tide will lift all boats to some degree.
      Alas, it is too early to make any definitive pronouncements.

Your comment:

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Most read in the last 20 days:

  • India’s Experiments with COVID-19
      Shooting from the Hip [ed. note: the tweets linked below mainly show videos from various lockdown phases]   Reminiscent of his demonetization effort in 2016, on 24th March 2020, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, appeared on TV and declared an immediate nationwide curfew. No one was to be allowed to leave wherever he or she happened to be. All flights, trains (after 167 years of continual operation) and road transportation came to a complete, shrieking...

Support Acting Man

Austrian Theory and Investment


The Review Insider


Dog Blow

THE GOLD CARTEL: Government Intervention on Gold, the Mega Bubble in Paper and What This Means for Your Future

Realtime Charts


Gold in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from]



Gold in EUR:

[Most Recent Quotes from]



Silver in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from]



Platinum in USD:

[Most Recent Quotes from]



USD - Index:

[Most Recent USD from]


Mish Talk

    Buy Silver Now!
    Buy Gold Now!