Aller au contenu

Armageddon économique ?


vincponcet

Messages recommandés

Au delà ce ça, la planification c'est un risque énorme, parce que si le planificateur se plante, tout le monde est bien profondément dans la merde.

Quand chacun a le droit de faire ce qu'il pense être bien, seulement certains se plantent, et ceux qui ne se sont pas plantés sont récompensés.

Lien vers le commentaire
Effectivement, ça en dit long sur l'aptitude du Marché à appréhender ce type de problématique :icon_up:

Depuis quand les libéraux disent-ils que le marché est une solution magique qui règlera tout les problèmes? A la différence de ceux qui promettent de tout régler d'un coup de baguette magique, les libéraux sont modestes et disent juste que c'est la moins pire des solutions pour les raisons explicitées par pankkake et H16. C'est à rajouter dans l'article marché de Wikibéral d'ailleurs

Lien vers le commentaire

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7b24ca0e-84ec-11…00779fd18c.html

Interbank lending grinds to near-standstill

By Michael Mackenzie in New York and David Oakley in London

Published: September 17 2008 20:39 | Last updated: September 17 2008 20:39

Interbank lending markets were in crisis on Wednesday as demand for cash sent yields on the three-month US Treasury bill, a beacon of safety, to its lowest level since 1941.

Funding in the short-term lending markets in both the US and Europe was close to a standstill, said traders.

Giuseppe Maraffino, fixed income strategist at Uni­Credit, said: “Banks are hoarding their cash because of this and this is putting a lot of strain on the financial system.”

RBS Greenwich in London said: “To say that conditions are dysfunctional and volatile does not do the state of play justice. In fact, it is probably fair to say that the markets have not been this anarchic and unstable as far back as most traders remember, especially in the US.”

All barometers of financial stress were at extreme levels as lending among banks in effect halted in the Libor market.

Treasury bills were highly sought as investors and money managers reacted to the news late on Tuesday that shares in a money market fund had fallen below $1, threatening investors with losses, in the wake of Lehman Brothers filing for bankruptcy.

The yield on three-month Treasury bills traded as low as 0.02 per cent and the so-called TED spread, or difference between three-month Libor and the yield on the three-month Treasury bill, reached a record 3.04 per cent. The last time it reached 3 per cent was after the stock market fall of October 1987.

A swap tracking the expected difference between the Fed funds rate and three-month Libor for the next three months exploded to 166 basis points.

It opened at 121bp in London on Wednesday, up from 116bp late in New York on Tuesday.

The demand for owning Treasuries in effect stalled the government repurchase or repo market, where institutions borrow cash by pledging notes and bonds as collateral.

Traders said demand had overwhelmed supply. While a holder of Treasuries could lend them out in exchange for cash at rates near zero per cent, risk aversion was paramount.

Scott Skyrm, senior vice-president at Newedge, a repo broker, said: “All the US Treasuries are gone from the market.”

The storm in the repo and interbank markets ruptured the interest rate swap market.

The two-year swap spread, which reflects the credit quality of banks in the Libor market and is the difference between Treasury and money market collateral, surged to an all-time record above 130 basis points. In March, the spread hit a record 110bp.

European repo rates were also at highs as banks again showed reluctance to exchange cash for anything except German bunds, with the spread between three-month European repo rates and expected overnight lending rates rising further.

Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

Lien vers le commentaire

Un article qui explique pourquoi le sauvetage d'AIG est totalement contraire aux statuts de la Fed et n'est rien moins qu'une nouvelle forme de nationalisation méprisant le droit de propriété:

"Comrade Bernanke Does it Again"

http://www.321gold.com/editorials/schiff/schiff091808.html

"Who needs bolsheviks when you have the Fed?"

Lien vers le commentaire
Un article qui explique pourquoi le sauvetage d'AIG est totalement contraire aux statuts de la Fed et n'est rien moins qu'une nouvelle forme de nationalisation méprisant le droit de propriété:

"Comrade Bernanke Does it Again"

http://www.321gold.com/editorials/schiff/schiff091808.html

"Who needs bolsheviks when you have the Fed?"

Oui, d'ailleurs, je me demande comment se fait-il que des constitutionnalistes ne soient pas montés au créneau là dessus.

La Cour Suprème ne peut pas se saisir ?

Lien vers le commentaire

Le régulateur anglais des marchés interdit le short selling (action de vendre une action que l'on n'a pas, càd de parier à la baisse. Techniquement, il s'agit d'un emprunt d'une action, puis de la vente de cette action. Le remboursement devant se faire en action. Donc si l'action baisse, on gagne. à ne pas confondre avec le "naked short selling", action de vendre sans avoir préalablement emprunté l'action, càd que l'on vend quelque chose qui n'existe pas, l'astuce étant qu'il y a un délai de "livraison" de l'action vendue, et que l'on peut donc espérer acheter l'action avant l'échéance de la livraison. Le "naked short selling" est bien évidemment une arnaque. Le régulateur US, la SEC, a interdit le naked short sell, qu'il tolérait jusqu'alors.)

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/brit…p;dist=hplatest

British regulator bans short selling

By Steve Goldstein, MarketWatch

Last update: 1:27 p.m. EDT Sept. 18, 2008

Comments: 2

LONDON (MarketWatch) -- Britain's financial regulator, the Financial Services Authority, on Thursday took the unprecedented step of banning short selling after a week in which its top mortgage lender, HBOS, was pushed into a merger as its share price tumbled.

The moves by the FSA leapfrog the Securities and Exchange Commission's efforts on short selling, which only prohibit a particular method of betting against stocks called "naked short selling." See related story.

The FSA said in a statement that no short sales will be allowed, and that existing short positions cannot be added to.

Also, disclosure will be required on all positions of over 0.25% in a stock.

The FSA previously required disclosures of short sales on companies that were raising money through what is called rights issues, a practice referred to discounted stock offerings to existing shareholders.

In practical terms, the old rules were aimed at protecting banks, and these new ones are as well after HBOS (UK:HBOS: news, chart, profile) was forced into the hands of Lloyds TSB (UK:LLOY: news, chart, profile) . See related story.

A leading tabloid, the Daily Mirror, chronicled on its front page on Thursday "the greedy pig U.S. billionaire" - Philip Falcone of Harbinger Capital Partners -- who it accused of bringing HBOS to its knees.

The ban is due to remain in force until Jan. 16, 2009, but it will be reviewed in 30 days.

"While we still regard short-selling as a legitimate investment technique in normal market conditions, the current extreme circumstances have given rise to disorderly markets. As a result, we have taken this decisive action, after careful consideration, to protect the fundamental integrity and quality of markets and to guard against further instability in the financial sector," said Hector Sants, chief executive of the FSA. End of Story

Steve Goldstein is MarketWatch's London bureau chief.

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/sec-…5-4B99F863CE0C}

SEC stiffens rules on 'naked' short selling

Agency had been criticized by top lawmaker for inaction

By Robert Schroeder, MarketWatch

Last update: 11:03 a.m. EDT Sept. 17, 2008

Comments: 50

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The Securities and Exchange Commission issued new rules Wednesday aimed at protecting investors from so-called "naked" short selling of securities as the U.S. financial sector is experiencing one of its biggest shake-ups in history.

The agency required short sellers and their broker-dealers to deliver securities by the close of business on the settlement date, and said broker-dealers who violate the requirement will be prohibited from short sales in the same security unless certain conditions are met. See MarketWatch First Take commentary.

Regulators also made clear that those who lie about their intention or ability to deliver securities in time are breaking the law when they fail to deliver.

"These several actions today make it crystal clear that the SEC has zero tolerance for abusive naked short selling," SEC Chairman Christopher Cox said in a statement Wednesday.

A day earlier, Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd publicly criticized Cox for what he said was inadequate action on naked short selling.

"I've been disappointed," Dodd told reporters on Tuesday afternoon. "Where's the chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission?"

Short selling itself isn't illegal. But "naked" shorting can allow market-manipulators to force prices down much lower than would be possible in a legitimate short sale.

In an abusive naked short sale, according to the SEC, the seller doesn't borrow a stock, as would happen in an ordinary short sale. The seller also fails to deliver the stock to the buyer.

In a regular short sale, the seller borrows a stock and sells it, with the understanding that the loan has to be repaid by buying the stock.

The agency's rules go into effect Thursday morning.

The American Bankers Association applauded the agency's new rules but said they may not go far enough to protect banks from abusive practices. End of Story

Robert Schroeder is a reporter for MarketWatch in Washington.

L'indice des banques US (XLF) vient de passer de -6% à +2% d'un coup. Je ne sais pas si cela à un rapport avec cette news.

La Russie a fermé sa bourse parce qu'elle baissait de trop (-45% en 1 mois), mais maintenant aux us/uk, il est interdit de gagner à la baisse.

Lien vers le commentaire

Le naked short n'est pas une arnaque, les investisseurs savent qu'il y a un risque de contrepartie de l'echange quand ils achetent. Si tu veux acheter des actions en etant certain que tu ne l'achetes pas a un naked short, pour livraison immediate c'est possible aussi.

Lien vers le commentaire
Le naked short n'est pas une arnaque, les investisseurs savent qu'il y a un risque de contrepartie de l'echange quand ils achetent. Si tu veux acheter des actions en etant certain que tu ne l'achetes pas a un naked short, pour livraison immediate c'est possible aussi.

C'est une arnaque parce que tu vends quelque chose qui n'existe pas.

C'est le concept de la fiat monnaie appliqué aux actions.

Autrement, cela veux dire que même les actions ne représentent rien, que tout est crédit virtuel.

Et on ne va pas me croire qu'au 21ème siècle, on a besoin de plus de quelques millisecondes pour faire passer la propriété effective d'un titre dématéralisé d'une main à une autre.

La naked short sell est un moyen d'utiliser les délais réglementaires de livraison pour jouer au casino.

Ce n'est plus un risque de contrepartie à ce niveau là, la contrepartie se met elle même dans la possibilité de ne pas pouvoir te livrer.

Lien vers le commentaire
Oui, d'ailleurs, je me demande comment se fait-il que des constitutionnalistes ne soient pas montés au créneau là dessus.

La Cour Suprème ne peut pas se saisir ?

à noter que ça commence à tousser au congrès.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206…&refer=home

House Republicans Criticize U.S. Action on Crisis (Update2)

By Brian Faler

Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) -- A group of House Republicans criticized the Bush administration's response to the turmoil in financial markets as ``bailout mania.''

``Enough is enough,'' said Representative Jeb Hensarling of Texas. ``It's time to bail out the American taxpayers from bailout mania.''

He said the Republican Study Committee, a group of more than 100 self-described conservative lawmakers, plan to release a letter that asks Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to ``refrain from conducting any additional government-financed bailouts for large financial firms.''

``These massive federal bailouts have exposed taxpayers to literally tens of billions of dollars of new risk,'' and created a ``moral hazard where companies are absolved, not punished, for excessive risk taking,'' the letter says.

The criticism of President George W. Bush by members of his own party just six weeks before a national election suggests a growing backlash in Congress and the president's increasing isolation as his term draws to a close. Some have questioned whether Bernanke has too much power.

Bush, in comments today at the White House, said the administration will continue in its current course.

Stabilizing Markets

``The American people can be sure we will continue to act to strengthen and stabilize our financial markets and improve investor confidence,'' Bush said.

Separately, Republican presidential nominee John McCain called for the firing of Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox, saying he ``has betrayed the public's trust'' by failing to adequately police Wall Street. White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said Cox ``has the president's confidence.''

The furor over bailouts was triggered by a series of recent actions. The Federal Reserve Board, with support of the U.S. Treasury, invoked emergency powers to lend as much as $85 billion to American International Group Inc. to save the insurance giant from collapse. At the start of the week, Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. filed for bankruptcy. That followed the bailout of Bear Stearns Cos. in March, and the takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac earlier this month.

House Minority Leader John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, declined today to ``second-guess'' the policy makers' decision to take over AIG, saying ``history will show'' whether they made the right call. Boehner said he and other lawmakers are frustrated though that they haven't received more consultation on the decisions from the administration.

Seeking Information

``I am and all my colleagues here on the Hill are concerned about the lack of information, the lack of consultation that has occurred,'' he told reporters today. ``We are a separate branch of our government. Members are entitled to information.''

He said the administration ``refused'' to send someone to Capitol Hill today to meet with Hensarling's group. Asked whether Bernanke is going too far in using public money to shore up private companies, Boehner said: ``I have concerns as do all of my colleagues.''

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, expressed concern that Bernanke may have too much power to decide how to spend public dollars.

``I think Chairman Bernanke is a responsible and thoughtful person,'' said Frank. ``But no one in a democracy, unelected, should have $800 billion to dispense as he sees fit,'' he said. ``He can make any loan he wants under any terms to any entity or individual in America.''

To contact the reporter on this story: Brian Faler in Washington at bfaler@bloomberg.net.

Last Updated: September 18, 2008 13:25 EDT

Lien vers le commentaire
C'est une arnaque parce que tu vends quelque chose qui n'existe pas.

Tiens, cette histoire de vendre avant d'acheter, ça me rappelle Maurice Allais.

Et la réserve fractionnaire rentre dans le cadre de cette arnaque. Coup double pour le même Maurice Allais.

Lien vers le commentaire

Dans l'attente de la création d'une agence fédérale qui achètera les actifs pourris des banques, les bourses ont bien monté ajd…

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206…&refer=home

Paulson, Bernanke Seek Support for an Agency to Buy Bad Debt

By Alison Vekshin and Jim Rowley

Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Ben S. Bernanke will seek support from Congress for an agency to buy bad debt to address the deepening credit crisis, a Democratic lawmaker said.

Paulson and Bernanke will speak with congressional leaders this evening on current market conditions, Treasury spokeswoman Michele Davis said. Lawmakers warned this week the legislative calendar makes it difficult for Congress to act quickly enough to address a plunge in confidence in U.S. financial markets.

Democratic Senators Christopher Dodd and Charles Schumer have said the Federal Reserve, which is getting $200 billion in special funding from the Treasury this month, has the authority to take on a broader role.

``The Federal Reserve and the Treasury are realizing that we need a more comprehensive solution,'' said Schumer, who today proposed an agency to pump capital into troubled banks. ``I've been talking to them about it,'' Schumer, a Democrat who chairs the congressional Joint Economic Committee, told reporters in Washington today.

Schumer urged forming an agency to inject funds into financial companies in exchange for equity stakes and pledges to rewrite mortgages and make them more affordable.

Schumer advocated a Great Depression-era Reconstruction Finance Corp. model, different from the Resolution Trust Corp.- type plan others have floated. Another RTC, which was a 1990s agency that sold devalued assets in the Savings and Loan Crisis, would ``simply transfer excessive risk to the U.S. government without addressing the plight of homeowners,'' he said.

Stronger Response

An increasing number of lawmakers are advocating a stronger response to the crisis sparked by record homeowner defaults. The turmoil swept Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. into bankruptcy three days ago and prompted government takeovers of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and American International Group Inc. this month.

The Fed's role expanded further when the central bank agreed on Sept. 14 to accept a broader range of collateral, including equity, in exchange for loans to investment banks. The central bank today said loans to securities firms soared to a record $59.8 billion yesterday.

At the Fed's request, the Treasury yesterday instituted a supplemental funding program for the central bank allowing it to expand its balance sheet. The Treasury has announced a total of $200 billion of bill auctions so far under the program.

``Right now, we're working with the tools we have,'' Paulson said in remarks at the White House Sept. 15. Treasury and regulatory officials are ``all working together and we're going to do what's necessary to protect this system with the tools we have,'' he said.

Congressional Calendar

Setting up an RTC-type of fund would require an act of Congress. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Sept. 16 a proposal to have the U.S. create an agency to buy distressed debt won't be considered before Congress adjourns ahead of the Nov. 4 elections.

Fed spokeswoman Michelle Smith declined to comment.

Discussions with the Treasury and Fed focus on ``trying to do something more permanent'' after the series of government interventions, the New York senator said. For the Fed, ``it's hard for them to do monetary policy, which is their primary task, and then run all these businesses,'' he said.

Fed officials announced an $85 billion takeover of AIG two days ago, hours after leaving their benchmark interest rate unchanged in a decision that rebuffed some investors' calls for a cut.

``There is some preliminary discussions about how to sort of encapsulate and separate the two -- both to keep focus on monetary policy by the main Fed leaders, but also to prevent any conflicts of interest,'' Schumer said.

Ad Hoc Actions

Lawmakers are weighing responses to a crisis that prompted Paulson to seize Fannie and Freddie and caused the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. in the past two weeks. The Fed's takeover of AIG followed its March agreement to take on $29 billion of Bear Stearns Cos. assets to secure the company's takeover by JPMorgan Chase & Co.

``The series of ad-hoc interventions in the market over the past 10 days were important to avoid a systemic disaster,'' Schumer said. ``But we cannot continue to act in such an uncoordinated and ad-hoc fashion.''

Under Schumer's RFC plan, ``the government would come first,'' he said. ``The government would get repaid before the others in the financial chain.''

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank, a Massachusetts Democrat, this week proposed Congress create a federal entity to buy bad loans. Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, a former candidate for the Democratic nomination for president, proposed resurrecting a 1930s-era agency to stem foreclosures.

`Quarantining' Needed

``We need a modern day Home Owners' Loan Corporation,'' Clinton said in remarks at the Senate today. ``There will not be any semblance of a normal or orderly market'' without ``quarantining'' the devalued loans outstanding, she said.

The HOLC bought up outstanding mortgage and issued new, more affordable loans that helped people stay in their homes, Clinton said.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino yesterday indicated the White House is open to options.

Senate Democrats huddled at the U.S. Capitol today with former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers, who urged Congress to consider legislation to provide a short-term stimulus to the economy, said North Dakota Democrat Kent Conrad, who attended the meeting.

Summers, a Harvard University economist who served as President Bill Clinton's last Treasury secretary, recommended such a stimulus because ``now there is a loss of confidence and there is a significant decline in borrowing and spending, therefore a reduction in demand,'' Conrad said.

To contact the reporter on this story: Alison Vekshin in Washington at avekshin@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: September 18, 2008 18:43 EDT

Lien vers le commentaire
On privatise les profits mais on socialise les pertes. Sympa.

A part ça, à mes yeux d'inculte, tout ça donne l'impression que les finance boys se croient décidément bien plus malins qu'ils ne le sont réellement.

La russie interdit le short-selling, suivant ce modèle de capitalisme libéral qu'est la grande bretagne : http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/48a94422-8561-11…00779fd18c.html

Et les US suivrent : http://sec.gov/news/press/2008/2008-211.htm

à ce propos, le célèbre wallstreet cheerleader Jim Cramer explique que le short selling, c'est un acte de terrorisme contre l'amérique et le capitalisme, avec comparaison explicite avec le 11 septembre :

et le projet d'agence fédérale d'achat des actifs pourris des banques poursuit son chemin : http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1221774427…eTabs%3Darticle

à noter que ce genre d'agence à déjà été mise en place après la faillite des savings&loan des années 80 et pendant la grande dépression.

Là, on est en train de créer la même chose, alors que nous ne sommes pas encore officiellement en récession.

Maintenant, tout est possible. Acheter du riz et des pâtes, et barricadez la maison :icon_up:

Lien vers le commentaire
On privatise les profits mais on socialise les pertes. Sympa.

A part ça, à mes yeux d'inculte, tout ça donne l'impression que les finance boys se croient décidément bien plus malins qu'ils ne le sont réellement.

Si tu sais gérer ton propre budget, tu n'es pas si inculte que tu le penses.

Tout cela est très simple et repose sur l'illusion que l'on peut éternellement dépenser plus qu'on ne gagne. Si l'état américain, lui-même grévé de lourds déficits depuis 2002, intervient, ce sera juste pour maintenir cette illusion encore un peu plus.

Lien vers le commentaire

Je sais que c'est une cruche mais là, la thèse du Shock Capitalism de Naomi Klein se vérifie, sauf que si on regarde bien on voit que c'est du schock statism. Néanmoins, les institutions étatiques génèrent un choc en rendant l'accès aux liquidités trop bon marché trop longtemps pour les banques, et maintenant utilisent le choc comme justification pour donner plus d'argent aux mêmes banquiers.

Lien vers le commentaire
On privatise les profits mais on socialise les pertes. Sympa.

Cela me parait être exactement l'inverse puisque finalement la FED rachète pour une bouchée de pain des entreprises qui sont certes en difficulté aujourd'hui mais qui valent encore beaucoup d'argent (mais ne trouvent pas d'acheteur) et qui recommenceront à faire de gros profits dés la fin de la crise.

Ce que l'on reproche aux privés, que l'on nomme pour l'occasion des "requins", devient subitement une bonne chose quand c'est l'Etat qui agit de la sorte.

En outre, la FED détenant potentiellement une liquidité infinie et fixe les taux qu'elle veut, elle fausse complètement le marché et je me demande si cela ne va pas aggraver les chose après l'accalmie de façade générée par son action.

Je déteste ce climat de merde qui va nous mener tout droit vers toujours plus de réglementation. La prochaine crise sera encore plus profonde.

PS: avez-vous remarqué que les média font parler les individus les plus médiocres et les plus malhonnêtes? Même sur BFM, ça semble être la panique et on a droit régulièrement à Attali ou à l'abject André Lévy-Lang. Le discours de Pierre Nanterme fait peur; ça sent le copinage avec l'Etat et la mise en place de règles ad hoc désignant l'Etat comme garantie, c'est à dire exactement ce qui est à l'origine de la crise aux USA.

Lien vers le commentaire
Cela me parait être exactement l'inverse puisque finalement la FED rachète pour une bouchée de pain des entreprises qui sont certes en difficulté aujourd'hui mais qui valent encore beaucoup d'argent (mais ne trouvent pas d'acheteur) et qui recommenceront à faire de gros profits dés la fin de la crise.

La plupart des banques ont perdu leur capital, elles ne valent rien, pire, leurs engagements coutent une fortune. Si elles n'utilisaient pas des artifices comptables approuvés par l'Etat, on verrait bien qu'elles ont une valeur comptable négative.

Lien vers le commentaire
La plupart des banques ont perdu leur capital, elles ne valent rien, pire, leurs engagements coutent une fortune. Si elles n'utilisaient pas des artifices comptables approuvés par l'Etat, on verrait bien qu'elles ont une valeur comptable négative.

Tout a fait, et si en effet, l’Etat (ou ses organes) peut ‘gagner’ de l’argent en faisant un allez retour, c’est un montage pour se financer indirectement par la planche a billet, c’est pas difficile de prendre une société en faillite, de fabriquer quelques milliards pour la renflouer, puis de la revendre…

Si dans le privé certains font de même, c’est qu’ils ont un accès a la planche a billet en question, ce n’est pas du tout comparable au rachat d’une entreprise au capital sous évalué.

Cela dit, a la découpe, il y a des morceaux de banques qui ont encore énormément de valeur, il ‘suffit’ de séparer le capital de la dette, d’annuler la dette et de revendre le capital, et il y a encore de quoi faire (en oubliant ceux qui possèdent la dette bien sur, mais bon… ca fait partie du contrat quand tu achète une obligation, tu sais que tu passe après pas mal de monde en cas de faillite)

Lien vers le commentaire
Tout a fait, et si en effet, l’Etat (ou ses organes) peut ‘gagner’ de l’argent en faisant un allez retour, c’est un montage pour se financer indirectement par la planche a billet, c’est pas difficile de prendre une société en faillite, de fabriquer quelques milliards pour la renflouer, puis de la revendre…

Si dans le privé certains font de même, c’est qu’ils ont un accès a la planche a billet en question, ce n’est pas du tout comparable au rachat d’une entreprise au capital sous évalué.

Cela dit, a la découpe, il y a des morceaux de banques qui ont encore énormément de valeur, il ‘suffit’ de séparer le capital de la dette, d’annuler la dette et de revendre le capital, et il y a encore de quoi faire (en oubliant ceux qui possèdent la dette bien sur, mais bon… ca fait partie du contrat quand tu achète une obligation, tu sais que tu passe après pas mal de monde en cas de faillite)

Et tu auras un beau domino de faillites avec le risque de contrepartie.

Lien vers le commentaire

Créer un compte ou se connecter pour commenter

Vous devez être membre afin de pouvoir déposer un commentaire

Créer un compte

Créez un compte sur notre communauté. C’est facile !

Créer un nouveau compte

Se connecter

Vous avez déjà un compte ? Connectez-vous ici.

Connectez-vous maintenant
×
×
  • Créer...