My favorite story so far involving the financial crisis.

This post and the underlying story comprise the most amusing anecdote I've read since this entire mess began. I don't know what the ethics are of blockquoting an entire post but whatever, it's too good:

How to lose on a sure-fire bet

There was a wonderful story in today's WSJ about how some big banks managed to lose some of their hard-earned TARP money. 

Let me begin with a little background. A credit default swap is sometimes described as an insurance contract written against the possibility of default of a particular underlying asset. If I buy a CDS and the specified asset defaults, I get to collect money from whoever sold me the contract. If I also have a long position in the asset in question, I might consider buying a CDS written against that asset as an insurance or hedge against the possibility that the asset loses its value. 

But I don't actually have to own the asset in question in order to buy a CDS from somebody else. I might want to buy a CDS as a partial hedge against some other asset I hold with which the specified security could be correlated. Or maybe I just feel like making a bet with somebody I think is dumber than I am. 

The fun and games begin when multiple contracts get written on a single credit event and the notional value of outstanding contracts on that event-- the total amount of money that is promised to be paid to the buyers of those CDS in the event of a default on the underlying asset-- becomes larger than the par value of the underlying asset itself. Then it would clearly pay the party who sold those contracts to buy the underlying asset itself at par, relieve the original debtors of their burdensome obligations, and be out only $X (the underlying event) rather than some multiple of $X (all the contracts written on the event). 

And so the WSJ recounts the tale of a security based on $29 million (par) worth of subprime loans in California, half of which were already delinquent or in default. Betting that the loans weren't worth $29 million sounds like easy money, and the smart guys were willing to pay 80 to 90 cents for each dollar of CDS insurance. 

It appears from the WSJ account as if little Amherst Holdings of Austin, Texas was happy to sell the big guys like J.P. Morgan Chase, Royal Bank of Scotland, and Bank of America something like $130 million notional CDS on a $27 million credit event, used the proceeds to buy off and make good the underlying subprime loans, and pocketed $70 million or so for their troubles. The big guys, on the other hand, paid perhaps a hundred million and got back zip. 

Comments

[Jimmy Choo UGG]

Herr Abbas erklärte mehr als 126 internationalen Standorten erfahrene heute anerkannte Palästina als eine sagen, und auch seine / ihre Personen stiegen aus verbundenen laufen mit Geduld., [url=http://www.uggkaufen.net/jimmy-choo-ugg-wholesale-1.html]Jimmy Choo UGG[/url] : "Unsere ehrlichen neben der weiterhin Projekte zu realisieren über Diskussionen und auch Dateigröße, die ein Ende setzen kann, um arbeiten zusammen mit über als unvoreingenommene palästinensischen sagen bietet erreichte eine Sackgasse, keine leblosen Schluss gekommen, "dieser Person erklärt. "Wir werden die insbesondere der Vereinten Nationen für Sie erfordern einige unserer namhaften gegebenenfalls den Erhalt komplette Programm nach Palästina innerhalb der Firma zu bekommen," dieser Person hinzu., [url=http://www.uggkaufen.net/]günstige ugg[/url] erklärt, dieses Individuum, das diese Person würde wahrscheinlich für die Abstimmung zu suchen das Problem innerhalb der Schutz der lokalen Behörden und des Rates, alle gehen in der Regel an irgendwelche Einzelpersonen Veto führen wird.