[George Pazin]

Believing in free markets does not mean you believe everyone should be forced to sell everything at all times, which is essentially the firesale situation mark-to-market creates.

It never ceases to amaze me how people think of markets. Markets are not evil people, evil corporations, mysterious hidden forces - markets are simply the amalgamation of many many individual decisions, the overwhelming majority of which are made by people both more knowledgeable and more properly motivated than any government politician or bureaucrat. Free markets does not mean zero regulation any more than liberty means a complete absence of laws. No laws is not free, it is anarchy.

Those who criticise free markets are more often than not simply folks who think they are smarter than everyone else and somehow are willing to put their blind faith in politicians provided it's their own politicians, not the other guys'. It boggles my mind that anyone would prefer ANY politician(s) to a free market. Free markets are merely the extension of liberty to the economic arena.

And to all you haters, it's JinDal, not Jingal. If you're gonna act like a know it all, at least get it right.

[PCCraig]

Morgan Stanley suspending most participation at Memorial golf tournament
Entertaining out at Memorial tourney
By Becky Yerak

Tribune reporter

February 26, 2009

 Given the criticism Northern Trust Corp. faced for entertaining people at its golf tournament, Morgan Stanley has decided to avoid the links.

Morgan Stanley, which received a $10 billion injection of government funds, will continue to sponsor the Memorial Tournament, but company representatives won't be going. "We're not participating this year due to the environment," a Morgan spokeswoman told the Tribune on Wednesday.

The Memorial Tournament will be held June 4-7 in Dublin, Ohio, outside Columbus.

The decision came a day after Chicago-based Northern Trust came under fire for wining and dining clients at its namesake PGA event.

On Tuesday, the bank, which received about $1.5 billion in November as part of the Treasury Department's Troubled Asset Relief Program, was criticized by several U.S. congressmen for flying hundreds of employees and clients to last week's Northern Trust Open in Los Angeles, putting some of them up at ritzy hotels, and treating them to concerts by Chicago, Earth Wind & Fire, and Sheryl Crow.

Several House Democrats termed the activities irresponsible and called on Northern, which caters to wealthy clients and institutions, to return to the federal government the equivalent of what the bank "frittered away on these lavish events."

Northern said its spending was related to its five-year, $35 million commitment, signed in 2007, to sponsor the tournament, which it uses to maintain client relationships.

The bank also pointed out that U.S. taxpayers are contractually assured a return on their investment. Currently, Northern Trust said, it pays the government $78.8 million on an annual basis as a return on taxpayers' money, or $19.7 million per quarter.

Separately, Northern Trust told the Tribune on Wednesday that it had no policy changes to announce related to the golf tournament, which was held Feb. 19-22.

Northern also has posted a letter to employees, shareholders and clients on its Web site (www.northerntrust.com) addressing questions about its golf sponsorship.

byerak@tribune.com



Copyright © 2009, Chicago Tribune

 

[Craig Sweet]

I think the financial institutions that sponsor golf tournaments, and other events, could get a whole lot of badly needed good publicity if they down played the corporate parties at these events and made more of their charitable contributions from sponsoring these events....something along the lines of..."times are tough, and we in the banking industry have lost your trust...obviously we sponsor this event to market our services, and in years past we have used it to reward our employees for a job well done....but lately we aren't doing so well...so no parties this year....but one thing that will not change is our commitment to raising money for local charities....in the last three years we have helped raise over $15 million dollars for charity...and this year, we will help raise another $5 million...blah..blah..blah...thank you for watching, and enjoy the golf"

[jeffwarne]

I think the financial institutions that sponsor golf tournaments, and other events, could get a whole lot of badly needed good publicity if they down played the corporate parties at these events and made more of their charitable contributions from sponsoring these events....something along the lines of..."times are tough, and we in the banking industry have lost your trust...obviously we sponsor this event to market our services, and in years past we have used it to reward our employees for a job well done....but lately we aren't doing so well...so no parties this year....but one thing that will not change is our commitment to raising money for local charities....in the last three years we have helped raise over $15 million dollars for charity...and this year, we will help raise another $5 million...blah..blah..blah...thank you for watching, and enjoy the golf"

Craig,
Great post.
I think we can all agree on that.

there are a lot of parties/entertainment functions in the tournament cities that many people rely on as a large part of their income however.

In Augusta,where I'm from, many people make a LARGE (say 20-40%) of their income that week.
If a corporation has booked an event and cancels, that hurts.
Many people, particularly older people on fixed incomes rent out their houses to corporations-a loss of all that would hurt.

The lavishness will come to an end, either by choice or by popular (or at least loud) mandate, but all actions have unintended consequences.

Sometimes Congress in their zeal to grandstand (or act on what they feel is right) forgets that.
To quote Obama when criticized about all the spending in the recent bill-
"It is called a stimulus bill"

[Dean Stokes]

I think the financial institutions that sponsor golf tournaments, and other events, could get a whole lot of badly needed good publicity if they down played the corporate parties at these events and made more of their charitable contributions from sponsoring these events....something along the lines of..."times are tough, and we in the banking industry have lost your trust...obviously we sponsor this event to market our services, and in years past we have used it to reward our employees for a job well done....but lately we aren't doing so well...so no parties this year....but one thing that will not change is our commitment to raising money for local charities....in the last three years we have helped raise over $15 million dollars for charity...and this year, we will help raise another $5 million...blah..blah..blah...thank you for watching, and enjoy the golf"

Craig,

are the parties/events held to reward NT's own employees for great work or are they held primarily to thank clients for there business?

I always thought the latter and that NT's staff were there to sell/market/smooze(if you like) old clients and possible new clients.

I am in sales and marketing. One of the first and most important aspects of the business I have learned is that in a bad market you MUST continue advertising/marketing and staying in front of consumers. The companies that drop there advertising budgets will disappear and find it harder to come back when the market does.

It seems to me all in all that NT are doing a fairly good job.

One more thing while I decide to post. They are honoring their contract. For that I fully respect them.

[Craig Sweet]

You're right Dean and that should be told

[Brent Hutto]

Dean,

The lavish entertainment is primarily the people making the decisions granting themselves an orgy of perks. All the customer and employee stuff is a side effect and cover for what is basically done to spend Other Peoples Money as ostentatiously as possible. It's one teeny, tiny, insignificant form of the agency problems that underlie our entire (collapsed) financial system.

Do you think anyone joins the PGA Tour in order to make life better for the people served by charities that benefit from hosting tournaments? Never confuse rationalization and angling for non-profit status with altruism. Same for the people running publicly-held companies and their "marketing" and "entertainment" justifications. Guys with authority over Other Peoples Money do what they do and part of that is things like sponsoring sporting events and hiring Earth, Wind and Fire to perform at their parties. Politicians do what they do and part of that is things like soapboxing at the expense of corporate boondoggles.

The rest of of do what we do and that mostly involves showing up to work every day and filling out our tax forms come April.

[Craig Sweet]

I'd love to have Earth, Wind and Fire perform at my birthday party this June!  How cool would that be? 

regardless of who the parties are for...going forward and telling the story behind their sponsorship, the money raised for charity, etc. would be better than this bad press....and the PGA, as their partners, could also step up.

[Jim_Kennedy]

  No one really gives a hoot if a banker throws a party, or stockbrokers buy multi million dollar jets and 1/4 million $$$ bathrooms when times are good, but don't throw it in their faces during hard times
  All the government is saying to the banks is that if you take the taxpayer's money you need to follow some rules, and one of them is etiquette. You would think that a company who sponsors a golf tournament would understand that.
  Have they forgot about manners, are they so out of touch with the rest of society that they don't see what's happening around them, is it purely arrogance, or a sense of entitlement that blinds them? Look what happened to poor old Marie Antoinette, and she was only misunderstood.
  I don't know what they are thinking, but I do believe that a wider number of us have tasted more treats and lived better over the last 30 years than at any other time in our history. That's been enough for most people to remain happy and play along, even when during this time period they saw the income at the top rise by 34% while theirs in the middle only rose by 11 1/2 %, and those at the lowest earning levels only saw a 4% increase. Even the share of income has increased for the top 1/5 of earners, from 42 to 50%, versus a loss for those near the bottom, from 7 down to 5%.
  We all better hope Obama and his crew get it right, at least most of it.

[Mike Hendren]

I don't think there is a way to fix this mess.
The cat is out of the bag.

Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding - we have a winner.

Great line the other day:  This mess is like a canker sore - you can treat it and it will go away in seven days, or do nothing and it will be cured in one week.

There are two cures for a hangover:  1) time; and 2) not getting drunk.

Also, there is absolutely nothing you can do to help a homeowner who purchased at an inflated price with no downpayment and subsequently cash-out refinanced to install stainless appliances and granite countertops (i.e., the American Dream) and heloc'd their way to a gas-guzzling SUV and splendid vacation or two.   You do the math:  $400,000 100% loan, $450,000 cash-out refinance, $75,000 heloc loan and 30% decline in home values.  Voila - hello Jacques Cousteau. 

Stupid is expensive. 

Bogey

You can't fix stupid.
-  Comedian Ron White

[Jeff Goldman]

Jeff, I'd be right there with you if it weren't true.

The market couldn't value assets because there wasn't a market.

You leave out the obvious.  For the market to value assets, there has to be a market and it has to be liquid and at least think it's well informed.  When there's nobody playing and those playing think they're playing blind, that's simply not a market and that's where the mark-to-market accounting rules fail - they assume a liquid, informed market.  If it's not there for whatever reason, then it's less than useless as an accounting standard.

 

No market? 

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/02/fdic-145-billion-in-distressed-loans.html

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2009/pr09026.html

30 bids sounds like a market to me.

[Mike Sweeney]

No market? 

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/02/fdic-145-billion-in-distressed-loans.html

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2009/pr09026.html

30 bids sounds like a market to me.

Jeff,

As much as I am enjoying Shivas eating crow, I am pissed that this gets no press. I was running around today so maybe I am wrong, but this should be getting more press from Washington. This is really nice to see.

[Bob_Huntley]

I wrote to the Senior Senator for the State of California yesterday, with what I think could be a reasonable way to reduce the inventory of unsold fore-closed homes on the market.

Forget about Governmental monies but allow that any purchaser of a fore-closed home be allow to sell whenever he/she wished, but be relieved of paying a capital gains tax. The loss of tax revenues would be infinitely smaller than the money currently being sloshed around.


Bob

[Bill_McBride]

Jeff, I'd be right there with you if it weren't true.

The market couldn't value assets because there wasn't a market.

You leave out the obvious.  For the market to value assets, there has to be a market and it has to be liquid and at least think it's well informed.  When there's nobody playing and those playing think they're playing blind, that's simply not a market and that's where the mark-to-market accounting rules fail - they assume a liquid, informed market.  If it's not there for whatever reason, then it's less than useless as an accounting standard.

 

No market? 

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2009/02/fdic-145-billion-in-distressed-loans.html

http://www.fdic.gov/news/news/press/2009/pr09026.html

30 bids sounds like a market to me.

Any idea what the % of original value was?  We won't get out of this mess until mark-to-market is a more accurate valuation of those instruments.

[Rich Goodale]

(Oh, and by the way, Keefe Bruyette is a pretty bright bunch, even though hardly anybody has ever heard of them...)

I've heard of him.  He's Keefe Richards' evil twin brother, who inspired the song "Under My Thumb."

[Lou_Duran]

We won't get out of this mess until the consumer believes that the country is going in the right direction and employers other than the government will be prosperous enough- translation: making those hated PROFITS that Obama stated are not for these times- to pay their wages.  We saw commercial land prices in D/FW reduced by as much as 90% during the S & L crisis.  I sold apartment complexes and commercial buildings for below 30% of replacement cost.  Those equally hated markets likely have not seen the shadow of the bottom yet, and Obama may get his wish, the economy could deteriorate to the level he has been claiming- "the worst since the Great Depression".

Yesterday, the local paper reported that the area's largest remaining home builder announced it was ceasing operations (built more than 30,000 homes over the past decade).  It also carried a report that Nortel was cutting back its U.S. workforce by 13%, and with 3,000 high paying positions here, the downsizing could be particularly painful.  A third article noted that area home sales were at the lowest point in well over 10 years.

We have been looking to buy a house, and a car to replace one of our two 1998 models.  Last evening we met with a realtor and visited the two final candidates.  We informed him that an offer would be forthcoming in the next day or so.

This morning I am greeted with the headline "Obama aims high with budget", "$3.6 trillion proposal that targets global warming, health care likely to fuel battle over tax hikes, deficit".  The article went on to say that the budget called for changes in tax policy which would decimate the oil and gas industry in one broad stroke, and that the new spending initiatives would result in dizzying deficits for generations.  In the tone of former V-P Gore's contempt for the internal combustion engine, Obama makes no bones about his disdain for fossil fuels.  And if he destroys the economies of several states in the process, well, they probably voted Republican anyways (CA is the exception and its masochism will finally be rewarded with hugely disproportionate amounts of federal welfare at the expense of TX, OK, LA).

Later this morning I will be sending the realtor an E-Mail telling him that we will need the weekend to think things through.  As I am typing this, I am leaning heavily toward extending my apartment lease- management companies are getting very aggressive with one month free rent on leases as short as six months- and make do with our well-maintained 11+ year old vehicles.  Maybe I am not as patriotic as V-P Biden would like for me to be.  I wish I could be, but caution/discretion is the better part of valor.  And, if as Newsweek proclaimed with glee in its 2/16/09 cover "We Are All Socialists Now", maybe I can do my collectivist duty by allowing my comrades to take my share that I won't need.

Earlier in this thread, Tom Doak challenged David Scmidt and me to describe what we would do to get us through this mess.  David took the bait and suggested one of the more preposterous plans (the forced 0% bond) I've seen from a smart person.  I actually prepared a response, but it was too lengthy and wordy as usual, so I didn't post it.

Having been reminded earlier by Sir Huntley that brevity is the soul of wit, I offer the following:  take any proposal made by Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid, Frank, and Dodd and do the complete opposite.

I really hate to come clean, but I sure wish that if justice had to prevail and a Democrat had to win the election to deservedly punish the terribly disappointing Republicans of the past eight years, it should have been Senator Clinton, pumpkin legs, Willie, and all (a little red meat to the lefties here).  Arrgh!  There.  I am purged.  I feel better.

   

[Rich Goodale]

Lou

You know what the conundrum is?  We got into this fine mess by massive overconsumption, fuelled by irrational exuberance, with a "conservative" government acting as the head cheerleader, and now when credit availability and demand have collapsed all the "solutions" are asking us to start spending more money again!

If we, and the rest of the world, don't take a sabbatical from excessive consumption and channel resources into capital/infrastructure projects we are doomed to repeat the mistakes of our very recent history.

Obama's plans are very much flawed, but they trend in the right direction.  The Republican alternative is nothing more than complete drivel.  Even your smartest guy, Jindal, couldn't put lipstick on that dead pig.

See you at KP VII!

Rich

[Craig Sweet]

According to economist James Galbraith the banks have money to loan, but the market for lending money has dried up...in other words, people are not in a buying mood....of course, he says that is only one of the problems behind this crisis....


This thread is getting far away from it's original intention....I would much rather see some discussion about whether the economic crisis is going to dry up sponsors for major sporting events, and how should those sponsors left standing go about promoting and handling their relationship with the event.

[Lou_Duran]

A conundrum?  Yes.  Overconsumption, mostly right.   " 'Conservative' government", you are a pretty smart guy, but that is total nonesense, as is the suggestion that Obama's plans are in the "right direction" unless you are so Keynesian to believe that digging holes and then refilling them is a good thing.

We no doubt disagree vehemently, but we are in the present mess primarily because of vote-buying, populist Democrat policies positing that people who can't afford houses should still have them, financed by the private sector forced under the power of the gun and facilitated with implicitly government guaranteed mortages provided by Fannie and Freddy.  Yes, Bush touted the ownership society and tried to take some credit for the highest rate of home ownership in history during his administration, but he and a number of other Republicans at least called for reform to stop the crazy growth in the portfolios of these "private" government institutions (home of such Democrat luminaries as Raines, Johnson, Gorelick, etc. making tens of millions in salaries and those hated bonuses), to no avail.  And, as you know, the private sector, given the opportunity to make money without much downside, will always take the money and run.

What really drove the final nail in the coffin was the huge and rather sudden jump in petroleum prices which slowed the economy and wrecked the already strapped budgets of marginal, irresponsible debtors.  Obama blames Bush for bad energy policy.  I think the blame lies with the Democrat's strategy for gaining and holding onto power: divide and conquer, amalgamate disparate special interest groups while trying to appease each of their sometimes common, but often diverging agendas.

Just like the left in government has been the protagonist in the destruction of the American steel and auto industries, it has pretty much ensnared domestic oil and gas production to the extent that we've been driven to the Middle East and other unfriendly places to meet our energy needs.  The envirowhackos have their man in power and the world will pay a steep price.  If you believe that Obama will be successful in weaning our society from oil and replacing it with "clean" alternative sources without huge displancements and enduring, extreme pain, well, I hope that for the sake of your children, you are right.

The Republican alternative is complete drivel?  Well, I didn't see Jindal and I didn't go to Harvard or Stanford.    But I have a lot more confidence in the ability of productive Americans- those who actually work and pay federal income taxes- to spend their own money more wisely on what they want and need, than to have it sent to that black hole that is Washington so part of it can be siphoned off for Pelosi's own commerical jet and ACORN's subsidies to pay its "volunteers", and have a few pennies on the dollar spent by a politician or bureaucrat on our behalf.

Significant "permanent" tax rate cuts have worked at least three times in my lifetime.  They are the bane of "smart people" who have no qualms for substituting their preferences with other people's money for those of not so smart types who would rather be left alone.  New Deal policies by the admission of their chief architect were totally ineffective and only increased the nation's debt.  Johnson's "Great Society" welfare state decimated the black family and pretty much created a permanent underclass.  So, you think that these policies on steroids are "in the right direction" while tax cuts are "complete drivel"?  Nearly 30 years in industry has led me to the conclusion that pure horsepower is vastly overrated. 

As to the KP, hopefully I will be in a better mood by then.  I don't sweat big things easily.

[Craig Sweet]

Lou.."But I have a lot more confidence in the ability of productive Americans- those who actually work and pay federal income taxes.


How do you propose putting people to work?  Tell me...


Here's how I would do it...tax cuts for middle class...to spur some spending.

Investment in infrastructure over the next 18 months....you might call that digging holes and filling them....but you and I know that is baloney....this investment needs to happen.

Investment in alternatives to fossil fuels...the latest spike in oil prices should be enough to scare us all into action....

[Ed Oden]

This thread is getting far away from it's original intention....I would much rather see some discussion about whether the economic crisis is going to dry up sponsors for major sporting events, and how should those sponsors left standing go about promoting and handling their relationship with the event.

Craig, if this is any indication, sponsors may increasingly run for the hills...

http://obssqueeze.blogspot.com/2009/02/other-side-of-bank-outrage-part-2.html

[Bill_McBride]

Lou.."But I have a lot more confidence in the ability of productive Americans- those who actually work and pay federal income taxes.


How do you propose putting people to work?  Tell me...


Here's how I would do it...tax cuts for middle class...to spur some spending.

Investment in infrastructure over the next 18 months....you might call that digging holes and filling them....but you and I know that is baloney....this investment needs to happen.

Investment in alternatives to fossil fuels...the latest spike in oil prices should be enough to scare us all into action....

That sounds like the Obama prescription.  Let's hope it works.

I love the way Lou wants to blame everything on the Democrats after 8 years of Bush administration and 6 years of solid GOP control.  I believe the Dems were in no position to dictate housing policy with Bush in the White House.  Bush bought into the "ownership society" lock stock and barrel.

I'm not much of a praying guy but currently praying this massive infusion of borrowed money into our broken economy works.

[Rich Goodale]

Hi, Lou.  Working backwards.....

You cannot help but be in a better mood at KP, although watching my silky smooth swing might belie that.

As to tax cuts--been there, done that, got the threadbare t-shirts.  When you have a fire caused by too much money in circulation, the last thing you do is throw more money onto the fire.  That's what I mean by "drivel."

As for oil, it is in our best interests to let the 3rd world deplete their oil reserves while we save ours and maintain our edge in exploration technology..  Regarding steel, we have a much more fundamentally strong industry than we did 25 years ago.  US Steel is now an oil company.  Go figure.....

As for why oil prices jumped?  Three words--War on Terror.  I think it was the right policy, but one of the consequences was $100+/bbl oil.  Don't blame that consequence on the Demos.

As for disagreement, yes.  As for "vehemently," no.

One of the best things posted here recently, or ever, was Double Bogey's quote of the axiom to the effect of:

"I you have a cold sore and treat it as the doctor advises, it will heal in 7 days.  If you leave it alone it will heal in a week."

That's what's going to happen to this crisis.  The "doctors" may take credit, but they will be wrong....

Slainte

Rich

[John Keenan]

In what will probably be a failed attempt to get this back to the original topic what happens to professional golf if suddenly the sponsors go away? Another option may well be the money  declines dramatically?

PGA and all the rest shorten the season to just a few events? The Majors will I suspect survive but will it be with just a hand few of other events?

Tough time for professional golf.

[Craig Van Egmond]

Lou/Craig/Bill,

    If you guys are going to spread blame, you need to look no further than the American consumer. Nobody pointed guns at peoples heads and said you must buy a house they can't afford, drive gus guzzling cars and generally live way beyond their means. We Americans have gotten greedy and created a since of entitlement. I'm entitled to a big screen tv, a 3 car garage filled with so much crap I can't park my cars in it, etc..     The baby boomers went from peace and love to greedy bastards in 30 years time. Make no mistake about it the baby boomers are running the show and have been since Bill Clinton.

   There's plenty of blame to go around. I used to 'joke' that the republicans of the last 8 years spent like drunken democrats, but now the democrats are spending like drunken republicans. And that ain't good folks.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()