Just the Facts

verfasst von leibovitz, 03.12.2001, 21:00

ich halte mal fest:(ganz unten hats ein sehr interessanter link)

erster link:
man kauft sachen wie Treasury securities.

"...This sort of liquidity crisis could imperil even healthy financial institutions that are temporarily short of cash or tradable assets such as U.S. Treasury securities.."

FED als ein sprungbrett:

"The first and most important question for the central bank is always, 'Do you have credit problems?'" said E. Gerald Corrigan, former president of the New York Federal Reserve Bank and now an executive at Goldman Sachs & Co."

tritt nicht selber als käufer auf, vermittelt sicherheiten:
"The Fed kept the markets going by flooding the banking system with reserves and stating publicly that it was ready to extend loans to important financial institutions, if needed."

was das SEC macht:
"The most drastic -- and probably unlikely -- move the SEC could take in a crisis would be to propose a market shutdown to the president"
+
"The SEC, CFTC and Treasury have market surveillance units. They monitor not only the overall markets, but also the cash positions of all the major stock and commodity brokerages and large traders."
+
"If they concluded that a firm was going down, they would try to move customer positions from that firm to solvent institutions."

zusammenfassung:
" Encouraged the New York Stock Exchange to stay open.

* Encouraged big commercial banks not to pull loans to major Wall Street houses.

* Kept open a subsidiary of Continental Illinois Bank that was the largest lender to the commodity trading houses in Chicago.

* Flooded the banking system with money to meet financial obligations.

* Announced it was ready to extend loans to important financial institutions.

nun zum 2ten link..

erster text:
Some market watchers suspected....
Some are speculating that....

2ter text:
ist link nr. 1

3ter text:
kann interpretiert werden...
"Recognizing the goals of enhancing the integrity, efficiency, orderliness, and competitiveness of our Nation's financial markets and maintaining investor confidence, the Working Group shall identify and consider"..." the actions, including governmental actions under existing laws and regulations"

dieser link hat sein ziel noch nicht erreicht..

3ter link:

stock market als firma, wenn ich das recht verstehe. aber nicht die quotierten aktien. oder?
"The US financial regulators' first concern is the state of the US stock market. They wonder whether to intervene as the Hong Kong Monetary Authority did in 1998 and buy a proportion of the country's stock market."

bei den währungen:
"Decision-makers discuss the use of the government's exchange stabilization fund to bolster Brazil and other emerging markets. But they fear the congress on Capitol Hill"don't have a clear sense of what's going on"

sie kaufen nicht die aktien, stellen aber die auszahlungen (redemtion) sicher:

"The Regulators and Central Banking group are suddenly faced with a new crisis. Two of the biggest mutual funds have come to the SEC saying they are experiencing redemption rates that could be life-threatening. They need an injection of cash to meet the payments without having to dump their portfolio on the market at fire-sale rates. Failure of one, let alone several mutual funds, would cause a huge loss of public confidence, and a run on the entire multi-billion dollar US mutual fund industry.

The Regulators approach blue-chip bank JP Morgan and discuss the Fed secretly guaranteeing a huge line of credit to the two funds. Morgan would take excess collateral, but it wouldn't be taking the credit risk of the mutual fund companies themselves. That would be borne by the Fed."

nicht schlecht der link, unbedingt das ganze lesen. aber in keiner kriese wurden direkt aktien von firmen gekauft.

und nun zum 4ten Link.

überzeugt euch dieser satz? mich nicht.
"He and the Bush administration need to inject money directly into the
market. They need to buy the heck out of stock index futures
contracts, which will give a lift to the entire equities market."By John Crudele New York Post

dieser link bringt auch kein licht ins dunkle.. ist nicht so, dass ich's nicht glauben will aber es ist so oberflächlich.. reisserisch geschrieben..

link nr 5 ist der selbe text welcher in link nr. 2 dritter text.
bringt mir den artikel mit der entsprechenden interpretation, bitte.


lesst lieber mal das hier, viel interessanter (bin mir nicht sicher obs ein back-door access ist):

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/ag/hag10643.000/hag10643_0.htm

While the President's Working Group report does not give details on regulatory relief for futures exchanges, it does conclude that the CFTC should provide appropriate regulatory relief for the exchange-traded financial futures.
I would like to note that Chairman Combest, Ranking Member Stenholm, and some of our colleagues in the Senate and I have signed a letter to Chairman Rainer asking him and the CFTC to provide us with a proposal for futures market regulatory relief. He and many others at the Commission have worked hard to produce that proposal. I am looking forward to an in-depth briefing later this week, and hope that the proposal helps give us guidance for legislative regulatory relief.
Another aspect of CEA modernization I would like to address is the Shad/Johnson Accord. The President's Working Group members believe that the current prohibition on single-stock futures can be repealed if issues about the integrity of the underlying securities market and the regulatory arbitrage are resolved.
Chairman Combest, Ranking Member Stenholm, Chairman Bliley and I all signed a letter to Chairman Levitt of the SEC and Chairman Rainer of the CFTC, asking them to create and present to us a plan regarding the Shad/Johnson. We hope to have their proposal and response by February 21 of this year.


.........

And like Mr. Stenholm, I am anxious to find out what recommendations you might have, under what conditions you think that single-stock futures might be permitted, trading might be permitted, so hopefully if that is something that can be addressed in the context of what we need to get done this year. Obviously the legal certainty issue is paramount consideration, but I think we all are interested in what can we come to agreement on, what can we find consensus on, and what can we get done, knowing that there are some of these things that need to be............











<ul> ~ hier">http://commdocs.house.gov/committee...hag10643.000/hag10643_0.htm]hier klicken für den gov link </ul>
<center>

<HR>

</center>

Thread gesperrt

 

gesamter Thread:

• Auszug aus einem Beitrag im Aboforum - JüKü, 03.12.2001, 14:52
  • Re: Auszug aus einem Beitrag im Aboforum - leibovitz, 03.12.2001, 15:07
    • Du bist wohl nicht lange dabei? - uluwatu, 03.12.2001, 15:32
      • hahahahahhahah - leibovitz, 03.12.2001, 16:32
        • Re: hahahahahhahah - XERXES, 03.12.2001, 16:48
          • Re: hahahahahhahah - leibovitz, 03.12.2001, 16:57
            • Re: hahahahahhahah - XERXES, 03.12.2001, 18:20
        • Das Kaufen erledigen Banken (vor allem Investmentbanken), das Geld dazu - Doosie, 03.12.2001, 16:59
          • nicht überzeugt ;) - leibovitz, 03.12.2001, 17:04
            • Das mit dem Falschgeld Drucken ist doch recht plausibel! - Heller, 03.12.2001, 17:28
              • absage und 2te mögliche ursache - leibovitz, 03.12.2001, 17:57
                • Re: die ueberheblichkeit spricht von beleidigung, hahahahahahaha!! [[herz-rot]] - almoehi, 03.12.2001, 19:48
                • Keiner will oder braucht Dich zu überzeugen. - Standing Bear, 03.12.2001, 22:25
            • Schade, dass du im Januar 2001 nicht mitbekommen hast, wie damals die Meldung - Doosie, 03.12.2001, 23:09
        • sehr witzig - uluwatu, 03.12.2001, 18:15
    • Re: PPT / Working Group on Financial Markets / mehrere Links - JÃœKÃœ, 03.12.2001, 18:56
      • Just the Facts - leibovitz, 03.12.2001, 21:00