besten Dank @all. oT

verfasst von igelei, 02.11.2005, 15:12

-->>... umreißen, was das genau bedeutet:
>http://news.ft.com/cms/s/7bf10bb6-4a4b-11da-b8b1-0000779e2340.html
>Treasury moves to alleviate bond shortage
>By Jennifer Hughes
>Published: October 31 2005 20:54 | Last updated: October 31 2005 20:54
>The US Treasury is this week expected to set out its latest thinking on the creation of a special securities lending facility to relieve exceptional market shortages of Treasury bonds.
>
>The creation of such a backstop facility by the Treasury would mark a significant shift of the government’s role in the bond market.
>The Treasury is expected to discuss the idea with the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee, a group of non-government bond market experts that advise the department. It meets today ahead of the main quarterly refunding announcement tomorrow.
>Officials began soliciting comments earlier this year and, in August, said the Treasury would work towards a proposal that would, in effect, make it the market’s lender of last resort. Any plan would be aimed at easing strains on the repurchase, or repo, market - where securities are borrowed in exchange for cash - by issuing extra securities on some occasions when the original supply has become scarce.
>In a repo agreement, one party lends Treasuries to another and agrees to take them back on a set date. In effect, it helps those selling bonds short to borrow the notes they need to do so; it also allows traders to raise short-term loans using bonds as collateral.
>The repo market is a key source of market liquidity, and the Treasury fears any repeat of recent shortages of some types of bonds could hurt confidence and raise its borrowing costs.
>Economists at the New York Federal Reserve argue that a backstop facility would represent a “significant evolution” in the role of the Treasury.
>“Until recently, it was a virtually universal understanding that the Treasury issues securities to finance the federal deficit and refinance maturing debt . . . [securities] were always a consequence of the government’s need for cash,” wrote Kenneth Garbade and John Kambhu in a staff report last month.
>“A backstop lending facility would turn this on its head: the Treasury would be issuing securities not because it needs money, but because market participants need securities.”
>The issue has arisen following a number of significant “fails” which have disrupted the market. A fail occurs when bonds are not delivered or returned as agreed.
>One problem for the Treasury, however, is determining what situations would merit opening a backstop facility, since the fails of recent years have been caused by a variety of factors.
>After the terrorist attacks of September 2001, operational difficulties caused the problems. In that case, the Treasury used existing powers to “re-open” a security by selling more in an unscheduled auction to meet demand.
>In 2003, the problems centred around a shortage of one specific note, combined with a sharp change in interest rate expectations, which forced many participants to change their positions. Similar changes in expectations in April 2004 also caused a jump in fails, while, last June, problems related to unusually heavy demand to physically settle Treasury futures contracts amid limited availability of the cheapest notes with which to settle the instruments.
>The general proposals so far centre around a system to lend out securities for a short-term period based on certain criteria and at a negative “penalty” interest rate. The more demand for a note, the lower the interest rate the lender can charge for borrowing the cash in return and a negative rate costs the borrower, since the lender in effect gets free cash.
>However, not all market participants are in favour.
>“Unless capital charges for aged [ongoing] fails are increased significantly, there is minimal incentive for dealers to borrow bonds at a negative interest rate to clear up fails,” said Gerald Lucas and George Goncalves at Bank of America, who warned that it would lead participants to “game” the market.
>“The Street - both dealers and buyside accounts - knows that, if rates are pushed to the Treasury’s threshold, more supply will hit the market and cheapen the term rates,” they said.
>Danke
>MfG
>igelei

Thread gesperrt

 

gesamter Thread:

• Frage an dottore: Artikel in der FT kannst du bitte allgemeinverständl. mT - igelei, 02.11.2005, 08:36
  • Zu viel Spekulation - politico, 02.11.2005, 08:50
  • Re: Frage an dottore: Artikel in der FT kannst du bitte allgemeinverständl. mT - CRASH_GURU, 02.11.2005, 09:57
    • Re: Frage an dottore: Artikel in der FT kannst du bitte allgemeinverständl. mT - Popeye, 02.11.2005, 10:43
  • Re: Frage an dottore: Artikel in der FT kannst du bitte allgemeinverständl. mT - Popeye, 02.11.2005, 09:57
    • Re: Frage an dottore: Artikel in der FT kannst du bitte allgemeinverständl. mT - R.Deutsch, 02.11.2005, 10:45
      • Re: Frage an dottore: Artikel in der FT kannst du bitte allgemeinverständl. mT - Popeye, 02.11.2005, 11:17
        • Re: Sprachverwirrung:-) - R.Deutsch, 02.11.2005, 12:25
          • Re: Sprachverwirrung:-) - Popeye, 02.11.2005, 12:30
          • Re: Sprachverwirrung:-) / wie `jetzt offenbar beabsichtigt´? - - Elli -, 02.11.2005, 13:27
            • Re: Sprachverwirrung:-) / wie `jetzt offenbar beabsichtigt´? - R.Deutsch, 02.11.2005, 14:23
              • Re: Völlig normaler Vorgang - dottore, 02.11.2005, 14:52
                • Re: und wieder nix mit `Geld aus dem Nichts´ (o.Text) - - Elli -, 02.11.2005, 16:24
                  • Re: schade:-) (o.Text) - R.Deutsch, 02.11.2005, 17:03
                    • Re: schade:-) / Und? Was gelernt? Sonst wäre es wirklich schade (o.Text) - - Elli -, 02.11.2005, 18:11
                      • Re: Und? Was gelernt? Sonst wäre es wirklich schade - ja über Dich (o.Text) - R.Deutsch, 02.11.2005, 19:16
  • besten Dank @all. oT - igelei, 02.11.2005, 15:12