Michael Lewis (Author of Liar's Poker, Moneyball, The New New Thing, and Panic) offers some conventional wisdom about our culture's obsession with investing. I wish a lot of the bank executives had followed his advice. We'd be a lot richer for it. Some of his advice follows the Warren Buffett adage about investing in only what you understand.

Nationalizing the Banks -- Adopting Sweden's Bailout Plan

Barry Ritholtz says the banking system may need to be nationalized to save it. It would clear the decks and could help depositors. I disagree. Depositors are insured and the banks could also be converted to mutual banks owned by depositors. It would be a modified form of receivership. Nationalizing the big banks introduces politics and the gov't picking winners and losers. Why should Citigroup or Bank of America get rewarded for mismanagement when the local thrift that prudently managed its business does not get help?

read more | digg story

Calvin & Hobbes comic strip captures the truth

This link says so much about the current business climate. I get more truth from a Calvin & Hobbes strip than an entire month of The Wall Street Journal. This is courtesy of Barry Ritholtz' "The Big Picture" blog.

read more | digg story Click "Read More" to see the strip.

Bailouts: Where's all this cash coming from?

A couple hundred billion here and a couple hundred billion there. What's a few billion between friends? The government is spending hundreds of billions of dollars to sustain banks, AIG and the big mortgage aggregators, Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac. Is it really clear what we're buying as taxpayers? The money's being used to buy "toxic assets" but there is no clarity about what prices we're paying for subprime mortgages or other assets from banks to keep them solvent.
Citigroup's pricetag for a bailout grew by another $20 billion from the original $25 billion. The government also agreed to shoulder another $300 billion in losses from bad assets. How did Citigroup and the government come up with this figure? Do they just pull these numbers out of a hat? As a taxpayer, do I really want to own a business whose mismanagement makes GM look like a beacon of efficiency? Would it make more sense for the government to pay $30 billion to acquire all of Citigroup and close its doors? Taxpayers might be better off given the rising price tag for this mess.

Barry Ritholtz, who writes "The Big Picture" blog and is an investment strategist for Fusion IQ, says the bailout pricetag now exceeds $4.6 trillion. It is more than the combined cost of the Marshall Plan, NASA, the New Deal, the Louisiana Purchase, the Korean and Vietnam Wars, and the Iraq invasion. Bloomberg did some calculations and said the overall package is over $7 trillion. In other words, this is $24,000 for every American. I think the economy would have been a lot better off if The Fed and the Treasury just cut each person the checks. A $96,000 check for my household would eliminate my debts, pay a few years of tuition at a state college for my daughter and still leave enough for me to buy a car (effectively helping Detroit's autoworkers). Is that any less worthwhile than giving it to some poorly managed banks?

Instead, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury are keeping the printing press going and for no certain benefit, for ill defined objectives and for assets that do not have a clear market value. Our economy will be that like a South American banana republic when this is all done. We'll be begging the Chinese to lend our government more money and the dollar won't be worth much of anything. To top it off, President Bush and his Treasury Secretary have been absent in terms of providing leadership during this economic crisis. Could we just accelerate the Obama inauguration and evict Bush from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave?

Don't bail out the carmakers: The Economist

Politicians, business and the unions all want a bail-out of Ford and General Motors. That would be a mistake. Chapter 11 was made for situations like this. As article says: Bailing out Detroit would be a bad use of public money. It would be bad in principle, because it would be an open invitation to companies everywhere to apply for aid to survive the recession. Banks qualify for help because the entire economy depends upon their services. They are vulnerable to sudden collapses in confidence that can spread to other banks that are perfectly solvent. A good car company does not face the same threat. And although Detroit employs a network of suppliers, which would suffer if production shuts down, nothing would sap a recovery and job-creating enterprise like locking up badly used resources in poorly performing companies.

read more | digg story

Wall Street's Arrogance is Confounding

Originally published: Sunday, March 09, 2008

As I walked through Fortunoff's in the Woodbridge Mall today, I was amazed that the department store chain was bankrupt. It had great looking merchandise and customers. By those standards alone, any retailer would be successful. Yet the company is reorganizing under Chapter 11. This is not really surprising when you consider that a private equity firm bought control of it from the founding family.
Many of the people on Wall Street think they are smarter than people who work in other industries. This is despite the fact that these Wall Street gurus never really operated anything and their real world business experiences constitutes looking at a spreadsheet. In a perfect world for private equity firms, they buy a company from pooling together a portion of the purchase price from institutional investors (pension funds, hedge funds, investment banks) and borrowing the rest to seal a deal. They collect a fee from completing a deal. The private equity firm and its partners own the business, but plan to cash out at some point for more money when they list the company on a stock exchange.
However, the business world is rarely that smooth. Risk is sometimes mispriced; consumer tastes change; companies borrow too much; and sometimes the wrong people are left in charge. Eddie Lampert took over Sears and brought Kmart out of bankruptcy. Now he's finding out how hard it is to compete against Wal-Mart. He might end up tarnishing his legendary status on Wall Street because of the struggles at the retailer. Will Sears go bankrupt? I doubt it, but their Sears Essentials store in my area looks like its having a tougher time than Fortunoff. It's surrounded by a Target, a Wal-Mart, Lowe's, Home Depot and a Macy's. I'm sure South Plainfield is not that much different than the rest of America's retailing climate. Trimaran Capital Partners and the Kier Group bought a majority stake in Fortunoff from the founding family in 2004. The Fortunoffs hoped that the firm would turn them into a national department store and still held a stake. Published reports listed Fortunoff's debts exceeding $300 million in November and assets of $268 million. This indicates risky capital structure that is vulnerable to downturns in consumer demand. A bankruptcy court and a new owner could give the company a chance to create a better capital structure. Trimaran and Kier Group's troubles with Fortunoff are not that unique in retailing. Levitz filed for bankruptcy again. Catalog retailer Lillian Vernon and gadget seller Sharper Image recently filed.
Wall Street firms have a pretty good history of mismanaging retailers. Macy's was taken private in a leveraged buyout in the late 1980s and that led to a bankruptcy. You might be impressed with some of the big salaries these private equity types collect. If they start prowling around your company, be very afraid. The pedigree of a Harvard MBA associated with these Wall Street gurus is not a guarantee that they know how to keep retail customers happy or the shelves of these stores well stocked.