Are Banks Bluffing About the Danger of Banking Regulation?
Four and a half years after the passage of TARP, one thing is abundantly clear: The American public really, really hates bank bailouts. And yet, nearly three years after the passage of the Dodd-Frank financial reform bill, it remains unclear whether our financial system is significantly safer, and whether taxpayers are any less likely to have to bail out another large bank in the future. That’s why an increasing number of voices on both sides of the political spectrum have been pressing for additional reforms that would reduce the chances that the federal government will have to step in to save another big, dumb bank. Adding to this chorus are financial economists Anat Admati and Martin Hellwig with an important new book called The Banker’s New Clothes, which offers what the Dodd-Frank legislation mostly lacked: a simple and elegant solution to the problem of financial stability. They argue that banks should fund themselves with more equity and less debt — or, to put it bluntly, ...
Competing as the rules change
Four years after the collapse of Lehman Brothers, the verdict appears to be that private equity (PE) overall has had a relatively good crisis: not enjoying a significant upsurge in popularity among investors, but at the same time not notably penalised by the heavy new regulation and pressure on its fundamental business model as was the case with investment banks.
Week commencing 14/01/13
Some commentary only indirectly related to private equity this week – although it does directly affect a leading private equity investor, as Ping An Insurance Group was looking to expand its investment into RMB PE funds, until new CSRC regulations against insurance company commitments to PE funds not co-managed by the investor reportedly forced a pullback towards the end of last year.
MarketWatch First Take: NYSE sale to ICE and the death of stocks
Decimalization and new market regulations made traditional equity trading a zero-sum game.
Goldman Sachs switches support to Romney
Tuesday, October 9, 2012 - 11:22 RICHARD A. BROOKS/AFP/Getty Images Goldman Sachs has long supported Democrats in the presidential contest. But not this year. Why Goldman and other Wall Street banks are throwing their support behind Mitt Romney. Goldman Sachs has long supported Democrats in the presidential contest. Goldman employees gave generously to then-Senator Barack Obama in 2008. But not this time. Goldman, along with the majority of people who work at big Wall Street banks, are backing former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney instead. One big reason? Dodd-Frank. Banks initially opposed the federal government's 2010 regulation of the financial sector. Perhaps even more significant, however, was the sense that Goldman and other highly influential institutions suddenly seemed a little less influential in Washington. Accustomed to members of Congressional Financial Services committees coming in for office visits, and frequent telephone communication, under Obama's White House, communciation ...