A new Finance Round-Up has been posted at TOD:Canada.

A bailout of sorts appears to be underway for the Enron-esque off balance sheet financial conduits known as Structured Investment Vehicles (SIVs), similar to the on-going Canadian attempt to rescue frozen Asset-Backed Commercial Paper (ABCP). However, the US Treasury-supported use of Frankenstein finance to bail out the effects of past Frankenstein finance smacks of desperation rather than inspiring confidence.

Something had to be done to forestall a looming firesale of assets that none of the banks want marked to market, but 90 days may well be too long to wait when a crunch period is fast approaching, and $100 billion may not be enough. With problems emerging for both commercial real estate and consumer spending, as well as ARMs resetting, all on top of the SIV/ABCP deepfreeze, it's hardly surprising that this rescue plan has been described as "rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic".


New! Master-Liquidity Enabler Conduit

S&L may yet be eclipsed. "The cost of the subprime crisis continues to mount on Wall Street. To date, the total stands at nearly $20 billion." (CNNMoney.com) Other estimates go far higher, dwarfing the S&L's $125 billion. "Ultimately, the total cost to ride out the storm would be more than any consortium of banks could afford." (USA Today)

The latest "Super-SIV" emergency financing scheme is an effort to enable the continuation of the credit binge. Some of the world's biggest banks plan to put about $100 billion in a fund that will be used to replace the investors who have stopped buying SIV-affiliated commercial paper.

"Details are still being worked out but the oversight committee of the three banks [Citigroup, J.P. Morgan and Bank of America] will set criteria for what the new fund, to be called the Master-Liquidity Enhancement Conduit, will buy." (Wall Street Journal)

If investors don't want the stuff, banks have to put it on their balance sheets and take the loss unless they can find another buyer, which it appears they intend to create.

Mary Shelley would be proud. Where did I leave my pitchfork?

This effort looks eerily similar to 1929, when the Rockefellers and William C. Durant pooled capital to buy large quantities of stocks to demonstrate their confidence in the markets to the public. The crash continued and the market lost $30 billion that week, ten times the annual budget of the federal government and more than the U.S. spent in World War I.

Stoneleigh: Here is another good take on this scam-the term "Banana Republic" does come to mind when you have the Treasury dept involved in such shenanagins. Ah, the glory of the all mighty "free market". http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article2481.html

Maybe they can get Andy Fastow to run the fund. It's right up his baliwork. The market won't buy toxic mortgage backed CDOs? What if we put lipstick on it?

RobertInTucson

I haven't escaped from reality. I have a daypass.

They have got a whole gang of Andy Fastows. IMO, they are going to have difficulty getting their cronies managing pension funds to buy any more of this crap, so the shmuck taxpayer is going to have to pick up the tab for this drunken spree. The US dollar will pay the price for the contamination of regulators by the connected.

Who do you think gets the sticky end when your pension fund buys this crap? More lipstick please.

RobertInTucson

I haven't escaped from reality. I have a daypass.

The market won't buy toxic mortgage backed CDOs? What if we put lipstick on it?

The market won't buy them, but I bet the US government will.

However, the US Treasury-supported use of Frankenstein finance to bail out the effects of past Frankenstein finance smacks of desperation rather than inspiring confidence.

Buried amongst your hysteria is the crucial fact that the neither Treasury Department nor any other U.S. government agency is spending one penny on this fund.

This appears to be a case of Citibank spending Citibank's money to bail out Citibank. JP Morgan and Bank of America are charging fees for the deal and not putting any money into it, as far as I can tell. The purpose appears to be to take assets off of their balance sheets or to avoid having to transact them publicly.

The Treasury Departments is merely putting their name behind it, inappropriately in my view.

Oddly, the AEI guy seems to be the only one who got it right:

A visiting scholar with the conservative American Enterprise Institute said, "I have never seen Treasury play this kind of role." [The banks made] "riskier investments that didn't work out. They should now put it back on their balance sheet." (WSJ)

Thanks for the word by word reprint of every article on this subject in the MSM (CNN Money, Yahoo Finance, etc. etc.). I am not even sure that you comprehend that the AEI guy is implying corruption. It is possible you understand that the US Treasury department was not intended to facilitate business dealings between private corporations, with the intention of improving their profitability. Someone is eventually going to have to take the hit for this scam-so far the US Treasury has participated in a scheme to stick third parties with it. If this scheme is unsuccessful, possibly the US taxpayer will eat it.

Sorry for letting the facts ruin your fun. I do hope you can continue to shelter yourself from reality and its unpleasant messenger the MSM. Why don't you just spend all of your time on the gold bug websites with no comments?