I haven't done one of these recently, so let's get caught up...
First, I've been re-working my asset allocation to be in line with Teresa Lo's satellite portfolio from her series on building your own investment portfolio. I'll have more to say on that shortly, along with my response to her comment, I promise!
Since I should officially achieve my goal of $20,000 in emergency savings by the middle of June, I will be adjusting my Direct Deposit into that account to a slower rate of accumulation. I have explained why I spent so much effort building up that account in a previous post, so I won't rehash it here. However, with this change, I will refocus my efforts on paying down the credit card debt which has been dogging me since last year. It feels great to finally attack this issue, but I absolutely wanted to make sure I was positioned in case of an emergency. I've dipped into my emergency funds for non-emergency situations a bit too often in the last year.
Since I decreased my withholding a few weeks ago as well, this latest change means that I can ratchet up my 401(k) contributions again. That holds benefits on 2 fronts. First, I'll reduce my adjusted gross income (AGI) which will reduce my overall taxable income while allowing me to take home more money with every paycheck. Second, I'll still be able to maintain some accruals to my emergency account, just at a slower pace, so that I can focus on the debt re-payment. I also get the benefit of freeing up some capital to direct into my self-directed Roth IRA. I'm going to have to give some thought as to what I'll do with that account. I had considered doing tax lien and tax sale investments, but we'll see. I'm not sure at this point.
(As an aside, I just received an e-mail reminder to increase my 401(k) contribution amount to 15% in 2 days. For this, I love technology!)
The one blemish on this record was alluded to in my most recent post, that being the need to buy my way out of the horribly flawed real estate partnership to which I belong. If I do have to put up money to get out of this albatross of an investment, I am prepared to put up as much as $10,000. On further thought, I may be able to put up even more IF it guarantees certain outcomes, such as refinancing the loan which is in my name. That house actually has a tenant in it now (its the only occupied house in the portfolio) so there should be coverage on the note. If I can force a refinance of the mortgage into the LLC's name, thus clearing me, I could put more funds into the LLC. As long as I can get out of this situation once and for all, I'll be happy. You will continue to hear more about this in the coming weeks. I set a deadline to be out of this position by the end of June.
I expect to take a potentially significant hit to my net worth due to the real estate partnership unwind, but my psyche will thank me for it. Doing so will also help me accomplish one more of my 2008 goals. Honestly, the best part is that I probably CAN pull that off and not be too terribly hurt by doing so. I have to be grateful for having the resources to do that, should the situation actually come to that. Thank God for a good job with good income from a solid, large company!
(Wow, did I really say that? I guess I did.)
Anyway, that's the story. Not exactly pretty, but it could be a lot worse. So now for the numbers...
My current net worth works out to $75,271.80. That includes a writedown to $0 of the real estate investment and the $35,000 in student loans I co-signed for. Actually, my investments, both in my taxable account and my 401(k), have done fairly well this year. I have unrealized gains of 29.48% on PRMSX, 10.96% on TREMX, 2.87% on PMF, and 2.7% on RPIBX. All of those are held in my taxable brokerage account. As for the 401(k), it is a bit difficult to calculate the change in individual positions. Its down 4.9% on the year, but I doubt much of that is due to the foreign equities even though they make up 47.1% of my 401(k).
Long ago, I wrote down the value of my car to $5000, and added $50 for the value of my old laptop. I may need to drop that back to $0 again though, in the pursuit of intellectual honesty. I'll check eBay first. My CC debt has been on the rise, although as I said, there will be immediate moves to reverse that. The CC debt is in the neighborhood of $15,000 currently. My brokerage account, as noted, has performed rather well. Once I start re-balancing into the positions in my re-designed portfolio, I plan to sell off large chunks of the existing holdings. I'll end up paying short term capital gains taxes, but I'll gain simplicity. As well, those gains will be heavily offset by previous investment losses and the continuing losses on the real estate partnership.
Anyway, that's everything I can think to mention, at least regarding the net worth situation. If anyone has questions or concerns, or anything was unclear, feel free to post in the comments.
Until next time, all...cheers!
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Monday, May 26, 2008
Devil, Get Behind Me!
NOTE: This will be long and profane. You have been warned.
Man oh man!
Everything was just going along swimmingly until this past Thursday, 22 May. Days like that are the type that tell you to have a nice stiff drink (or 8, which is what I did the following night). If I didn't know better (and maybe I don't), I'd swear my "partners" are trying their best to ruin me financially. Its time to be done with this stupid real estate partnership once and for all.
What's led to this realization is the news that while we have been dithering over the direction of one of our 3 properties in Baltimore (and I have to admit to dithering myself, out of resignation and disinterest), ALL of the copper was stripped out of the house. All of it!! Pipes, electrical wiring, everything. So God knows how much it will take to rehab the property now, on top of the $2000 in work it needed previously to clean up after the Section 8 tenant that we planned (and may still need) to evict.
I'd say its easily worth $10,000 to me to be done with this group. The litany of fuck ups over the last 2 years is too great to list, but I'm going to try anyway. We overpaid for our first bloody property. The first one!! Bought at auction. I should have seen the pattern emerging from that purchase, because we continued to overpay for properties (and overbid) during what is now commonly accepted as the end of the real estate bubble.
WTF?!?!?!
Much of this I attribute to the founder, whose idea it was to assemble this group, not really leading. It did not help that each of the 5 members is very intelligent; that made managing the group like herding cats. Every conversation would devolve into a huge digression into topics that had nothing to do with the issue at hand. I swear, had I not attempted to keep things on track during most of our meetings, we'd have never gotten a damn thing done.
So the leader didn't, and still doesn't, lead. That's pretty bad. On top of that, he and one of the other members who was selected as the financial manager (CFO, treasurer, whatever name you'd like to use for the position) take the position that they don't want to enter into any negotiation which they won't win. This does not make a damn bit of sense to me, and one of the other partners is equally perplexed. (The fifth partner, relatively speaking, has been absentee, considering the amount of time he's been involved in various discussions. He had some personal issues going on, so it is understandable that his attention and focus were elsewhere, but it still should not be an excuse.)
Now, anyone out there who invests in real estate is probably reading the above paragraph and shaking their head. I know I didn't get it when I was told this. Yes, the president and treasurer of our investment company decided that they did not want to make an offer on any property which they weren't assured of winning. Almost by definition, in order to win every property you make an offer on, you would have to overpay. Which is exactly what we did, and this can be attested to by the excruciating loans we have on all 3 properties. Now, pretty consistently, every successful investor I have met in the last 3 years has stated that you never pay full price. Seems like a simple enough concept, right? Buy low, sell high, all that shit? Not to my partners. When I and the fourth partner (the one who basically agrees with me 100%) heard that, you could hear our eyeballs fall out of our heads and hit the floor. For the life of me, I don't get why these guys would want to win every offer when you're playing a numbers game. I even tried to explain this using the analogy of asking women out for dates; you're not going to get a "yes" every single time, which is why you have to ask a lot of women out. (Could the fact that every partner except me is married explain why they didn't get this analogy???)
If you win every offer, then you're paying too much. The point of negotiation is to find a price that BOTH parties can work with, not just the seller! Yet, the entire idea was repulsive to my partners, as if their very personalities were tied up in receiving a "yes" to their offers. Would a "no" have meant the end of the world? Apparently, it would have to them. These guys actually argued against making initial offers 50% - 60% less than the sale price. I challenge any experienced investor to explain that to position to me. I guess this proves that we were amateurs. Fuck me!
I think the best advice I ever heard about negotiation was that the final agreed upon price should piss off both parties. The buyer should be upset that they didn't get a lower price, while the seller should be pissed that they didn't sell for more.
Now, not only did we overpay on the properties we purchased, but we also somehow managed to not get them inspected well, even when our handyman, who did most of the repairs (and does good work) performed the evaluations!! In one case, we clearly got greedy when we heard the numbers. We were able to get a nice neg am loan which would cost about $200/month, and take in $850/month in rent, roughly. And like idiots, we consummated this deal even though, throughout the process, the wholesaler we dealt with was screwing up every detail. (Never mind that the amount of rent he was charging kept shifting like the ground under Sichuan province, declining steadily from about $950 to a final $850 by closing.)
This all came to a head at closing with the bogus ass title company we worked with (instead of using our regular title lawyer, who is a legend in the state and city). The wholesaler tells us to tell the seller that we're his partners. WTF? You mean you misrepresented yourself to the seller to get the deal done. So why the hell did we bother closing the transaction; we could and should have just walked away from the table right there. We didn't. The tenant we inherited turned out to be the absolute worst, and we came within a hair of having to evict her before she left of her own volition. (I imagine the hand delivered notice from the sheriff played a part in convincing her of the error of her ways.) Fuck me twice!
At least the house still has copper in it, for the time being. We'll see how long that lasts.
*sigh*
Pick a problem. We've experienced it. This is absolutely the worst investing experience of my life, and I say that as someone who has lost money in a variety of investments. But at least in those cases, all the decisions were mine. I accept full responsibility for them. Losing money because you were outvoted, however, just makes you feel dirty. I've left out some other cock-ups just because I don't feel like talking about this bullshit any longer. I'm sure by now you get the picture.
Back in September or October, I told my partners that I wanted out. Now, all of the partners who were still in agreement could have simply made arrangements to buy me and my other partner out. These guys decided that there was no point in having the partnership if all 5 partners weren't involved. I don't get what sense that is supposed to make. Clearly, at least 2 partners disagreed with the direction of the other 2 (possibly 3) and should go their own ways. Our separation would have had little impact on the remaining 3 partners. However, I think these guys became emotionally attached to this LLC. Obviously, they've not heard that you should never fall in love with any investment.
So here we are, 9 months or so later. One of the 3 houses is rented, so we're no longer hemorrhaging money; its more like profuse bleeding now. Another is going to take at least $10,000 worth of work to make it livable, and the third has a ton of leftover junk in it (and hopefully, copper). Jesus! The whole situation is so stupid I can't even begin to describe. The worst part, for me, isn't the loss of money (not yet anyway). Its that I've wasted this much time fucking around with this whole stupid situation. I definitely didn't want to lose the money, and I sure as hell plan not to lose any more. (I will buy my freedom if I have to, though.) However, in the past 2 years, we did very few deals, and all of the deals we did were fundamentally flawed. My partners refuse to listen to people who were more knowledgeable, and let their emotions guide their decisions. I could have lost money on my own! I didn't need their fucking help with that!!! Needless to say, I'll either be getting out of this arrangement, or if I am unable to do that, I'll only help re-capitalize if there is a favorable change of control. The existing structure flatly does not work.
Needless to say, I'll be speaking to my lawyer about the best way to extricate myself from this fuckery on Tuesday. This is the only blemish on my otherwise perfect life right now. It will soon be dealt with though. My sanity and peace of mind are worth quite a bit more than what I stand to pay (read: lose) to get out of this dumb-ass predicament.
I'll get back into real estate investing eventually. I will NOT invest with partners, however. Oh hell naw! I thought a bunch of young, intelligent, motivated Black men could pull off a successful, long horizon investment in a portfolio of real estate. That would appear to be next to impossible. I have no problem doing it by myself, at some point in the future.
Anyway, my next post(s) will have more inspiring and positive words. I just needed to get that off my chest. Thanks for listening.
Cheers!
Man oh man!
Everything was just going along swimmingly until this past Thursday, 22 May. Days like that are the type that tell you to have a nice stiff drink (or 8, which is what I did the following night). If I didn't know better (and maybe I don't), I'd swear my "partners" are trying their best to ruin me financially. Its time to be done with this stupid real estate partnership once and for all.
What's led to this realization is the news that while we have been dithering over the direction of one of our 3 properties in Baltimore (and I have to admit to dithering myself, out of resignation and disinterest), ALL of the copper was stripped out of the house. All of it!! Pipes, electrical wiring, everything. So God knows how much it will take to rehab the property now, on top of the $2000 in work it needed previously to clean up after the Section 8 tenant that we planned (and may still need) to evict.
I'd say its easily worth $10,000 to me to be done with this group. The litany of fuck ups over the last 2 years is too great to list, but I'm going to try anyway. We overpaid for our first bloody property. The first one!! Bought at auction. I should have seen the pattern emerging from that purchase, because we continued to overpay for properties (and overbid) during what is now commonly accepted as the end of the real estate bubble.
WTF?!?!?!
Much of this I attribute to the founder, whose idea it was to assemble this group, not really leading. It did not help that each of the 5 members is very intelligent; that made managing the group like herding cats. Every conversation would devolve into a huge digression into topics that had nothing to do with the issue at hand. I swear, had I not attempted to keep things on track during most of our meetings, we'd have never gotten a damn thing done.
So the leader didn't, and still doesn't, lead. That's pretty bad. On top of that, he and one of the other members who was selected as the financial manager (CFO, treasurer, whatever name you'd like to use for the position) take the position that they don't want to enter into any negotiation which they won't win. This does not make a damn bit of sense to me, and one of the other partners is equally perplexed. (The fifth partner, relatively speaking, has been absentee, considering the amount of time he's been involved in various discussions. He had some personal issues going on, so it is understandable that his attention and focus were elsewhere, but it still should not be an excuse.)
Now, anyone out there who invests in real estate is probably reading the above paragraph and shaking their head. I know I didn't get it when I was told this. Yes, the president and treasurer of our investment company decided that they did not want to make an offer on any property which they weren't assured of winning. Almost by definition, in order to win every property you make an offer on, you would have to overpay. Which is exactly what we did, and this can be attested to by the excruciating loans we have on all 3 properties. Now, pretty consistently, every successful investor I have met in the last 3 years has stated that you never pay full price. Seems like a simple enough concept, right? Buy low, sell high, all that shit? Not to my partners. When I and the fourth partner (the one who basically agrees with me 100%) heard that, you could hear our eyeballs fall out of our heads and hit the floor. For the life of me, I don't get why these guys would want to win every offer when you're playing a numbers game. I even tried to explain this using the analogy of asking women out for dates; you're not going to get a "yes" every single time, which is why you have to ask a lot of women out. (Could the fact that every partner except me is married explain why they didn't get this analogy???)
If you win every offer, then you're paying too much. The point of negotiation is to find a price that BOTH parties can work with, not just the seller! Yet, the entire idea was repulsive to my partners, as if their very personalities were tied up in receiving a "yes" to their offers. Would a "no" have meant the end of the world? Apparently, it would have to them. These guys actually argued against making initial offers 50% - 60% less than the sale price. I challenge any experienced investor to explain that to position to me. I guess this proves that we were amateurs. Fuck me!
I think the best advice I ever heard about negotiation was that the final agreed upon price should piss off both parties. The buyer should be upset that they didn't get a lower price, while the seller should be pissed that they didn't sell for more.
Now, not only did we overpay on the properties we purchased, but we also somehow managed to not get them inspected well, even when our handyman, who did most of the repairs (and does good work) performed the evaluations!! In one case, we clearly got greedy when we heard the numbers. We were able to get a nice neg am loan which would cost about $200/month, and take in $850/month in rent, roughly. And like idiots, we consummated this deal even though, throughout the process, the wholesaler we dealt with was screwing up every detail. (Never mind that the amount of rent he was charging kept shifting like the ground under Sichuan province, declining steadily from about $950 to a final $850 by closing.)
This all came to a head at closing with the bogus ass title company we worked with (instead of using our regular title lawyer, who is a legend in the state and city). The wholesaler tells us to tell the seller that we're his partners. WTF? You mean you misrepresented yourself to the seller to get the deal done. So why the hell did we bother closing the transaction; we could and should have just walked away from the table right there. We didn't. The tenant we inherited turned out to be the absolute worst, and we came within a hair of having to evict her before she left of her own volition. (I imagine the hand delivered notice from the sheriff played a part in convincing her of the error of her ways.) Fuck me twice!
At least the house still has copper in it, for the time being. We'll see how long that lasts.
*sigh*
Pick a problem. We've experienced it. This is absolutely the worst investing experience of my life, and I say that as someone who has lost money in a variety of investments. But at least in those cases, all the decisions were mine. I accept full responsibility for them. Losing money because you were outvoted, however, just makes you feel dirty. I've left out some other cock-ups just because I don't feel like talking about this bullshit any longer. I'm sure by now you get the picture.
Back in September or October, I told my partners that I wanted out. Now, all of the partners who were still in agreement could have simply made arrangements to buy me and my other partner out. These guys decided that there was no point in having the partnership if all 5 partners weren't involved. I don't get what sense that is supposed to make. Clearly, at least 2 partners disagreed with the direction of the other 2 (possibly 3) and should go their own ways. Our separation would have had little impact on the remaining 3 partners. However, I think these guys became emotionally attached to this LLC. Obviously, they've not heard that you should never fall in love with any investment.
So here we are, 9 months or so later. One of the 3 houses is rented, so we're no longer hemorrhaging money; its more like profuse bleeding now. Another is going to take at least $10,000 worth of work to make it livable, and the third has a ton of leftover junk in it (and hopefully, copper). Jesus! The whole situation is so stupid I can't even begin to describe. The worst part, for me, isn't the loss of money (not yet anyway). Its that I've wasted this much time fucking around with this whole stupid situation. I definitely didn't want to lose the money, and I sure as hell plan not to lose any more. (I will buy my freedom if I have to, though.) However, in the past 2 years, we did very few deals, and all of the deals we did were fundamentally flawed. My partners refuse to listen to people who were more knowledgeable, and let their emotions guide their decisions. I could have lost money on my own! I didn't need their fucking help with that!!! Needless to say, I'll either be getting out of this arrangement, or if I am unable to do that, I'll only help re-capitalize if there is a favorable change of control. The existing structure flatly does not work.
Needless to say, I'll be speaking to my lawyer about the best way to extricate myself from this fuckery on Tuesday. This is the only blemish on my otherwise perfect life right now. It will soon be dealt with though. My sanity and peace of mind are worth quite a bit more than what I stand to pay (read: lose) to get out of this dumb-ass predicament.
I'll get back into real estate investing eventually. I will NOT invest with partners, however. Oh hell naw! I thought a bunch of young, intelligent, motivated Black men could pull off a successful, long horizon investment in a portfolio of real estate. That would appear to be next to impossible. I have no problem doing it by myself, at some point in the future.
Anyway, my next post(s) will have more inspiring and positive words. I just needed to get that off my chest. Thanks for listening.
Cheers!
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
2008 Goals Status Update
I was originally going to save this one for a few weeks from now, but that didn't make any sense to me after some consideration. I'm a blogger, dammit! I should be communicating and schitt.
The biggest goal update is that I am now one transfer of $1305 away to my emergency fund account. With that, and the interest from June, I will solidly be over my $20,000 target for 2008! Woo hoo! Its about bloody friggin' time, and it has been a long slog to get here. I won't recount the financial mistakes made along the way. (That's what the blog is for, so you can search back through previous posts and read about them at your leisure!) However, it will feel good to have that cushion in place.
Once this is built, I'm going to cut back the rate of Direct Deposit into the account significantly. Why? Because of this. We had this conversation a few months ago, and I said that there was a method to my madness. Using the majority of the funds I am no longer putting into my emergency account, I will get to work on retiring my only critical debt - credit card debt. I've racked this up over the last year, spending on trips and others, mostly in an effort to make myself feel better about my relationship fuckup last year. There were other legitimate uses of the card too, such as charitable contributions, and I love putting my rent on it. That builds up points sooo quickly, or at least it will once the debt is paid. I'm also tired of AmEx making so much on me. I have nothing against profit motive, but its time for me to stop being the profit center.
At the same time, I'm planning to open a new account, which will be Direct Deposited into at a rate of about $150 per pay period. (The total savings Direct Deposit will be $300, leaving over $500 per month for debt repayment. I put away close to 20% of my net pay every month.) Now that I think about this a bit more, though, it seems I am violating one of my cardinal saving rules, which is to consolidate balances in a single FDIC insured account if the balance is < $100,000. Hmmm. Maybe I won't open that new account after all, which is fine. I just did not want to mix savings for spending with my emergency savings. However, having only 1 account to manage is a plus, and I'll get the benefit of a heftier balance which will accrue interest more quickly. We'll see. I'm sure paying down that card will dramatically impact my credit score also, and for the better. While I'm fairly certain I'm high into the 700s (750 - 800 last I checked), its time to stop fuggin' around and get serious about my debt management. I've paid off over $30,000 in the past, so this will be a cake walk in comparison as the debt is less than half that amount. (At that time, I lived in southern California, slept on my girlfriend's sofa, commuted 80 miles one way to work, and made significantly less income with higher overall expenses.) I'm looking forward to seeing my net worth climb from the debt reduction, I have to admit.
So in a few weeks, I'll be able to say that I have nailed 2 of my goals for the year, and we're not even 50% done. Damn that feels good! I would say, to quote the great Gordon Gekko, "It was better than sex" but I'd be lying my ass off.
Until next time peeps...
The biggest goal update is that I am now one transfer of $1305 away to my emergency fund account. With that, and the interest from June, I will solidly be over my $20,000 target for 2008! Woo hoo! Its about bloody friggin' time, and it has been a long slog to get here. I won't recount the financial mistakes made along the way. (That's what the blog is for, so you can search back through previous posts and read about them at your leisure!) However, it will feel good to have that cushion in place.
Once this is built, I'm going to cut back the rate of Direct Deposit into the account significantly. Why? Because of this. We had this conversation a few months ago, and I said that there was a method to my madness. Using the majority of the funds I am no longer putting into my emergency account, I will get to work on retiring my only critical debt - credit card debt. I've racked this up over the last year, spending on trips and others, mostly in an effort to make myself feel better about my relationship fuckup last year. There were other legitimate uses of the card too, such as charitable contributions, and I love putting my rent on it. That builds up points sooo quickly, or at least it will once the debt is paid. I'm also tired of AmEx making so much on me. I have nothing against profit motive, but its time for me to stop being the profit center.
At the same time, I'm planning to open a new account, which will be Direct Deposited into at a rate of about $150 per pay period. (The total savings Direct Deposit will be $300, leaving over $500 per month for debt repayment. I put away close to 20% of my net pay every month.) Now that I think about this a bit more, though, it seems I am violating one of my cardinal saving rules, which is to consolidate balances in a single FDIC insured account if the balance is < $100,000. Hmmm. Maybe I won't open that new account after all, which is fine. I just did not want to mix savings for spending with my emergency savings. However, having only 1 account to manage is a plus, and I'll get the benefit of a heftier balance which will accrue interest more quickly. We'll see. I'm sure paying down that card will dramatically impact my credit score also, and for the better. While I'm fairly certain I'm high into the 700s (750 - 800 last I checked), its time to stop fuggin' around and get serious about my debt management. I've paid off over $30,000 in the past, so this will be a cake walk in comparison as the debt is less than half that amount. (At that time, I lived in southern California, slept on my girlfriend's sofa, commuted 80 miles one way to work, and made significantly less income with higher overall expenses.) I'm looking forward to seeing my net worth climb from the debt reduction, I have to admit.
So in a few weeks, I'll be able to say that I have nailed 2 of my goals for the year, and we're not even 50% done. Damn that feels good! I would say, to quote the great Gordon Gekko, "It was better than sex" but I'd be lying my ass off.
Until next time peeps...
BlackRock Buys MBS from UBS with UBS's Money?
I'm kind of surprised I didn't hear about this anywhere else yet.
So let me see if I understand. BlackRock buys $22B of MBS from UBS, and gets a 32% price reduction on the purchase. However, UBS loans BlackRock 75% of the purchase price, or $11.25B, specifically for this transaction. Thus, actual out of pocket cost to BlackRock is $3.75B, or 17% of the face value of the securities.
Now, the loan to BlackRock is supposed to be collateralized, but there's no mention of what the collateral is in this article.
Somehow, I can't help but wonder who got screwed here. Given the roles that both firms have taken on since the credit crunch started, I'm inclined to believe the one getting the shaft is UBS. I'd have to do a bit more analysis to conclusively say that, however. It is a strange structure, and I imagine that BlackRock sniffed around the portfolio and just wasn't coming on board for any more than the $3.75B. Nice work if you can get it. I wonder just how much BlackRock expects the portfolio to perform over the years. Clearly, they expect it to be decent, but that was based on the right purchase price. An 83% haircut sounds like a decent price to me!
I think the word "wow" just sums it up. Wow, that UBS could fumble so badly. Wow, that BlackRock is able to be so successfully mercenary. (That should be expected given Larry Fink's background and how well they seem to be capitalized going into this whole credit crisis, I guess.) There's just a lot of "wow" all around here. What does this mean for securities substantially similar to the ones in the portfolio BlackRock just bought (with little of their own money)? What about lower tranches, especially given the Moody's news. Where are market clearing prices going to be set now on these types of securities? Wow!
Anyway, I'm off to bed. Hope to see more about this deal in the next day or so. Until next time...
So let me see if I understand. BlackRock buys $22B of MBS from UBS, and gets a 32% price reduction on the purchase. However, UBS loans BlackRock 75% of the purchase price, or $11.25B, specifically for this transaction. Thus, actual out of pocket cost to BlackRock is $3.75B, or 17% of the face value of the securities.
Now, the loan to BlackRock is supposed to be collateralized, but there's no mention of what the collateral is in this article.
Somehow, I can't help but wonder who got screwed here. Given the roles that both firms have taken on since the credit crunch started, I'm inclined to believe the one getting the shaft is UBS. I'd have to do a bit more analysis to conclusively say that, however. It is a strange structure, and I imagine that BlackRock sniffed around the portfolio and just wasn't coming on board for any more than the $3.75B. Nice work if you can get it. I wonder just how much BlackRock expects the portfolio to perform over the years. Clearly, they expect it to be decent, but that was based on the right purchase price. An 83% haircut sounds like a decent price to me!
I think the word "wow" just sums it up. Wow, that UBS could fumble so badly. Wow, that BlackRock is able to be so successfully mercenary. (That should be expected given Larry Fink's background and how well they seem to be capitalized going into this whole credit crisis, I guess.) There's just a lot of "wow" all around here. What does this mean for securities substantially similar to the ones in the portfolio BlackRock just bought (with little of their own money)? What about lower tranches, especially given the Moody's news. Where are market clearing prices going to be set now on these types of securities? Wow!
Anyway, I'm off to bed. Hope to see more about this deal in the next day or so. Until next time...
Sheesh!
Its really sad that the only people who DON'T know that Americans are fuggin' morons are Americans.
Solicitations
I swear I'm getting several orders more solicitation calls these days. At first it was merely annoying but now its pissing me off.
I'm not a mean person. I help anyone I can, generally. And I love a good tax deduction as much as the next person. However, if this is what we have to look forward to for the rest of the year, maybe I should change my phone number!!! It's madness. I just received 2 calls back to back, and the first one I swear came from a group that has called me 3 times since January. (And I'm sure I made a donation on the 2nd call.)
Man, this year is really going to suck for a lot more people!
Update: Just saw this one over at Free Money Finance. I knew I wasn't the only one but I sure didn't expect the post on the topic 1 day after FMF. I'll have to adopt some of his techniques for dealing with this deluge.
I'm not a mean person. I help anyone I can, generally. And I love a good tax deduction as much as the next person. However, if this is what we have to look forward to for the rest of the year, maybe I should change my phone number!!! It's madness. I just received 2 calls back to back, and the first one I swear came from a group that has called me 3 times since January. (And I'm sure I made a donation on the 2nd call.)
Man, this year is really going to suck for a lot more people!
Update: Just saw this one over at Free Money Finance. I knew I wasn't the only one but I sure didn't expect the post on the topic 1 day after FMF. I'll have to adopt some of his techniques for dealing with this deluge.
I Hate MD-80s Anyway!
Nothing terribly surprising here, ya know?
I still wonder about selling American Beacon Advisors when that group appears to make money. Its probably one of the few groups left at AMR that does. How quickly will that $480M be burned through to pay out severance packages and fuel costs?
I guess it makes sense, on a certain level, to get a good price for the asset before it declines with the rest of the ship. Got that. Better to get $480M for it now instead of $250M (or less) in bankruptcy. Fair enough. How come they never thought to divest this non-core business during the last financial mania, when they probably could have reaped closer to $1B for it in a spin-off? I mean, all of the carriers have been making (some) money for a little while, never mind that its a generally crappy business. Weren't they even looking at their portfolio in the good times, trying to figure out what they could sell off for a decent price? That $1B would come in handy right about now.
I see more aircraft leases on tap, across the globe, and just generally declining sales for both EADS and Boeing. I wonder how long it will take for that to hit their bottom lines, if it hasn't already. (I don't think it has already. What seems to be hurting them the most right now is slow delivery of their next generation of aircraft. How many Dreamliner orders get canceled in the next year? Hmmm.) I don't see airlines willing to take on these depreciating assets, not onto their own balance sheets, if they can lease, especially as they are scaling back. The MD-80s are paid for, but the A380s and Dreamliners were to paid for out of (soon to be decreasing) revenues. I can't see those kind of capital programs lasting very long in this energy environment. Oh, and I see smaller crews on every flight going forward, of course.
This is the kind of situation that begs for a corporate raider or activist investor (or whatever euphemism - liquidator? - you want to use). I guess they all gave up on the business after Gekko took that huge L on Bluestar. So here come the days of 3 major US carriers, whether customers like it or not. People better get used to taking cruises to Mexico and around the Caribbean instead of flights to Asia or Europe, unless they're among the ranks of the aforementioned activists.
This really is what the US economy needs though, unfortunately. Overshoot on the way up, overshoot on the way down. Leverage and cheap money never seem to end well, and I imagine that's for a reason. How long until that lesson is forgotten?
Update: The party is over at blogs.wsj.com, courtesy of Heidi Moore. I see my 3 carrier remark echoed. THAT is a long overdue move.
Maybe I'll go transfer that last $1305 into the emergency fund tonight...
I still wonder about selling American Beacon Advisors when that group appears to make money. Its probably one of the few groups left at AMR that does. How quickly will that $480M be burned through to pay out severance packages and fuel costs?
I guess it makes sense, on a certain level, to get a good price for the asset before it declines with the rest of the ship. Got that. Better to get $480M for it now instead of $250M (or less) in bankruptcy. Fair enough. How come they never thought to divest this non-core business during the last financial mania, when they probably could have reaped closer to $1B for it in a spin-off? I mean, all of the carriers have been making (some) money for a little while, never mind that its a generally crappy business. Weren't they even looking at their portfolio in the good times, trying to figure out what they could sell off for a decent price? That $1B would come in handy right about now.
I see more aircraft leases on tap, across the globe, and just generally declining sales for both EADS and Boeing. I wonder how long it will take for that to hit their bottom lines, if it hasn't already. (I don't think it has already. What seems to be hurting them the most right now is slow delivery of their next generation of aircraft. How many Dreamliner orders get canceled in the next year? Hmmm.) I don't see airlines willing to take on these depreciating assets, not onto their own balance sheets, if they can lease, especially as they are scaling back. The MD-80s are paid for, but the A380s and Dreamliners were to paid for out of (soon to be decreasing) revenues. I can't see those kind of capital programs lasting very long in this energy environment. Oh, and I see smaller crews on every flight going forward, of course.
This is the kind of situation that begs for a corporate raider or activist investor (or whatever euphemism - liquidator? - you want to use). I guess they all gave up on the business after Gekko took that huge L on Bluestar. So here come the days of 3 major US carriers, whether customers like it or not. People better get used to taking cruises to Mexico and around the Caribbean instead of flights to Asia or Europe, unless they're among the ranks of the aforementioned activists.
This really is what the US economy needs though, unfortunately. Overshoot on the way up, overshoot on the way down. Leverage and cheap money never seem to end well, and I imagine that's for a reason. How long until that lesson is forgotten?
Update: The party is over at blogs.wsj.com, courtesy of Heidi Moore. I see my 3 carrier remark echoed. THAT is a long overdue move.
Maybe I'll go transfer that last $1305 into the emergency fund tonight...
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Yet Another Personal Goal
Yup, after Skip Barber, this is next on the list. Or it will be, once I draft "The List". Something to do on tomorrow's flight.
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
How Might Twitter Make Money
This must be the topic du jour among technophiles.
I'm no expert here either, but here's what I think of possible Twitter revenue models based on my last few weeks of use.
First, I'd be open to the Tiered model as suggested by Aidan Henry over at Read Write Web. I'm not quite sure where my price point would be, however. $5.99 for the year sounds reasonable.
However, I don't get why Twitter isn't partnering with the major carriers to get a cut of the fees generated from its user base who upgrade their text messaging plans. We've seen a lot of talk recently about how text messages, as currently priced, are outrageously expensive. Twitter needs to get a piece of THAT action! I know that's why I upgraded to unlimited text messaging; the Lyric of the Day was just too cool to miss, and contributing is a blast as well. I would imagine these conversations have been had, or are being had, and went nowhere. If they haven't been had, then they should be.
Anyway, although this has nothing seriously to do with finance, it does have to do with tech, which is another passion of mine. Combine that with the fact that Twitter is (ostensibly) a business and that there is money on the line, and I think it fits in a tangential way with this blog. Until Twitter finds a way to monetize, it will simply be a really cool idea, not a must-have service. That difference will likely be due to how long it manages to survive. Someone will make money off of Twitter, but the question is "will it be Twitter that makes money off of Twitter?"
Anyway, if you're interested enough, you'll find me on Twitter here. Take a look. You might find something worthwhile (speaking as a techie who avoided Twitter for over a year!).
Until next time...
I'm no expert here either, but here's what I think of possible Twitter revenue models based on my last few weeks of use.
First, I'd be open to the Tiered model as suggested by Aidan Henry over at Read Write Web. I'm not quite sure where my price point would be, however. $5.99 for the year sounds reasonable.
However, I don't get why Twitter isn't partnering with the major carriers to get a cut of the fees generated from its user base who upgrade their text messaging plans. We've seen a lot of talk recently about how text messages, as currently priced, are outrageously expensive. Twitter needs to get a piece of THAT action! I know that's why I upgraded to unlimited text messaging; the Lyric of the Day was just too cool to miss, and contributing is a blast as well. I would imagine these conversations have been had, or are being had, and went nowhere. If they haven't been had, then they should be.
Anyway, although this has nothing seriously to do with finance, it does have to do with tech, which is another passion of mine. Combine that with the fact that Twitter is (ostensibly) a business and that there is money on the line, and I think it fits in a tangential way with this blog. Until Twitter finds a way to monetize, it will simply be a really cool idea, not a must-have service. That difference will likely be due to how long it manages to survive. Someone will make money off of Twitter, but the question is "will it be Twitter that makes money off of Twitter?"
Anyway, if you're interested enough, you'll find me on Twitter here. Take a look. You might find something worthwhile (speaking as a techie who avoided Twitter for over a year!).
Until next time...
Tax the Bastards!
Wow!
And wow again!
I was led to this from Paul K's blog post. I think some of the comments over at Felix's blog tough on some things that Harvard could and should do. First, I'd vote for decreasing tuition even more, so that even more low income students can attend (in accordance with admission criteria, of course). Then taking a high school under its wing, and possibly even an elementary school, would be a great community service.
Harvard has the numbers to make this work without affecting either its asset gathering ability or its endowment size. From what I've heard about it (not much, admittedly), this might position them to take a liability driven investing (LDI) approach which may not necessarily make sense. At least, this is something I could see occurring, the endowment becoming more risk averse to the point of abandoning risk management.
Considering the compensation levels for faculty, I don't really get why there was an uproar about Meyer's compensation, or that of any of his lieutenants. They did good work -- active investment management -- and Harvard needs to put more of that money to use in the surrounding community if they want to keep Congress off their back. However, the 2 go hand in hand, right? More investment in the community, more spending of the funds that come in (or rather, are generated as investment returns) will keep the DC doctors away.
And wow again!
I was led to this from Paul K's blog post. I think some of the comments over at Felix's blog tough on some things that Harvard could and should do. First, I'd vote for decreasing tuition even more, so that even more low income students can attend (in accordance with admission criteria, of course). Then taking a high school under its wing, and possibly even an elementary school, would be a great community service.
Harvard has the numbers to make this work without affecting either its asset gathering ability or its endowment size. From what I've heard about it (not much, admittedly), this might position them to take a liability driven investing (LDI) approach which may not necessarily make sense. At least, this is something I could see occurring, the endowment becoming more risk averse to the point of abandoning risk management.
Considering the compensation levels for faculty, I don't really get why there was an uproar about Meyer's compensation, or that of any of his lieutenants. They did good work -- active investment management -- and Harvard needs to put more of that money to use in the surrounding community if they want to keep Congress off their back. However, the 2 go hand in hand, right? More investment in the community, more spending of the funds that come in (or rather, are generated as investment returns) will keep the DC doctors away.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Friday, May 09, 2008
Blog Recommendation: Financial Crookery
You'll notice that the rate of blog recommendations has slowed down quite a bit over time. As always, I seem to come across new blogs and sites to read, but many are only so-so, not consistently good. (I imagine someone has made such a decision about my blog as well. Such is life.) However, there are some really good ones out there, and in this post, I am pointing out the latest to join my pantheon of recommended blogs.
Financial Crookery.
This one has it all, or maybe most of it anyway, and in enough proportion to keep you coming back. Really sharp analysis is the most critical piece. While the writing may not be as rich as some of my other favorites (Going Private comes to mind), the quality of the material I have read is awesome. This one is probably log overdue.
Until next time, boys and girls. I'm going now to enjoy the weather while I prepare my response to Teresa Lo.
Cheers!
Financial Crookery.
This one has it all, or maybe most of it anyway, and in enough proportion to keep you coming back. Really sharp analysis is the most critical piece. While the writing may not be as rich as some of my other favorites (Going Private comes to mind), the quality of the material I have read is awesome. This one is probably log overdue.
Until next time, boys and girls. I'm going now to enjoy the weather while I prepare my response to Teresa Lo.
Cheers!
Shorting Puts Analysis
Over at Crossing Wall Street, Eddy E. has a post about shorting puts. I'm just trying to follow along and make sure I understand why this works, so consider this post to be me thinking aloud.
So Eddy is shorting puts, and from the sound of it, on individual stocks versus indices as he indicates The Great One has been doing.
(Financial Crookery has an analysis here as well.)
Anyway, from my reading, the situation described here is BRK holding stocks in their portfolio(s), then writing long dated (10 - 20 yr) puts against those indices. Writing puts is like selling insurance right, so it makes sense for what is essentially an insurance company to do so, on some level.
What we're doing in this situation is going short on a short - an implicit long. Our buyers for these puts are going to be people who think that, in the longer term, the various indices (and by extension, their components) are going to perform very poorly. The reasons they believe so are unimportant, relatively, at least if we are confident in our analysis. One imagines that BRK's CIO is confident in his analysis.
The puts themselves represent a hedge on the performance of the indices, which are probably fairly representative of the types of companies that BRK has expressed interest in owning in the future. That is, BRK is in the hunt for non-US based large corporations with large, steady cash flows, management experience, market undervaluation and/or large family control structures. Since private equity is somewhat handicapped by the credit markets, BRK is looking to do PE type takeouts on non-US large and mid-caps. Shorting the indices, which are composed largely of the types of competitors these targets would meet in their respective markets, becomes a hedge against underperformance off an equity index long position. Thus, we can probably deduce that BRK believes there is long term benefit to being long in these markets, and probably for more reasons than currency effects. (If that's all Buffett was hunting for, why not just go long the indices themselves and save the complexity?)
So BRK collects the premiums on the long dated puts. But are they really shorting them? Are we certain that BRK is not just selling the puts (either naked or covered)? The Forbes article seems a bit...shall we say "weak"...on the details. However, my thinking is that BRK just sold the puts as opposed to shorting them since in the latter case, at some point (probably way out in the future), BRK would have to cover its shorts. Is BRK's CIO really hedging his long term European equity exposure in this way? Its not impossible, especially since his holdings are fairly illiquid. However, he's also known as a long term holder, so why bother hedging. Selling the puts just gives him the ability to collect the premiums, and his equity holders should know that there can be volatility in the markets but also that he's not the short term type. Once collecting the premiums, he can invest them as he would like. BRK, as things stand now, can pay the claims if they happen to come due (e.g. the indices he sold against drop significantly enough).
I guess I'll just have to go digging a bit more in BRK's financial statements. However, if anyone wants to chime in to poke holes in my analysis, or just mention something I may have overlooked, by all means please do. Its a very curious arrangement that I'll take some time to investigate further in the near future.
Until next time...
So Eddy is shorting puts, and from the sound of it, on individual stocks versus indices as he indicates The Great One has been doing.
(Financial Crookery has an analysis here as well.)
Anyway, from my reading, the situation described here is BRK holding stocks in their portfolio(s), then writing long dated (10 - 20 yr) puts against those indices. Writing puts is like selling insurance right, so it makes sense for what is essentially an insurance company to do so, on some level.
What we're doing in this situation is going short on a short - an implicit long. Our buyers for these puts are going to be people who think that, in the longer term, the various indices (and by extension, their components) are going to perform very poorly. The reasons they believe so are unimportant, relatively, at least if we are confident in our analysis. One imagines that BRK's CIO is confident in his analysis.
The puts themselves represent a hedge on the performance of the indices, which are probably fairly representative of the types of companies that BRK has expressed interest in owning in the future. That is, BRK is in the hunt for non-US based large corporations with large, steady cash flows, management experience, market undervaluation and/or large family control structures. Since private equity is somewhat handicapped by the credit markets, BRK is looking to do PE type takeouts on non-US large and mid-caps. Shorting the indices, which are composed largely of the types of competitors these targets would meet in their respective markets, becomes a hedge against underperformance off an equity index long position. Thus, we can probably deduce that BRK believes there is long term benefit to being long in these markets, and probably for more reasons than currency effects. (If that's all Buffett was hunting for, why not just go long the indices themselves and save the complexity?)
So BRK collects the premiums on the long dated puts. But are they really shorting them? Are we certain that BRK is not just selling the puts (either naked or covered)? The Forbes article seems a bit...shall we say "weak"...on the details. However, my thinking is that BRK just sold the puts as opposed to shorting them since in the latter case, at some point (probably way out in the future), BRK would have to cover its shorts. Is BRK's CIO really hedging his long term European equity exposure in this way? Its not impossible, especially since his holdings are fairly illiquid. However, he's also known as a long term holder, so why bother hedging. Selling the puts just gives him the ability to collect the premiums, and his equity holders should know that there can be volatility in the markets but also that he's not the short term type. Once collecting the premiums, he can invest them as he would like. BRK, as things stand now, can pay the claims if they happen to come due (e.g. the indices he sold against drop significantly enough).
I guess I'll just have to go digging a bit more in BRK's financial statements. However, if anyone wants to chime in to poke holes in my analysis, or just mention something I may have overlooked, by all means please do. Its a very curious arrangement that I'll take some time to investigate further in the near future.
Until next time...
Tuesday, May 06, 2008
Vewy, Vewy Quiet
Yes, I have been on a brief hiatus from blogging. Not intentioned, mind you, but there's been a lot going on recently although its all coming to an end now.
I basically spent the weekend having as much fun as possible, first with a trip to Kings Dominion (where I rode almost everything) followed by "Iron Man" in digital projection (which is realistically the only way to see such a movie) and then dinner. What made it special was that one of my really good friends was able to join me and my students for this trip. He credits me with giving him one of the best birthday celebrations he's ever had. That works for me.
Sunday was slower, just hanging out with the same friend over at my best friend's house, eating his fantastic cooking, engaging in great conversation, and just enjoying the beautiful weather in the DC area. Talk about living. Simple pleasures are what its all about.
Anyway, now that I'm back I'm getting into the swing of things and catching up on all the stuff going on around me. Soon, I will be student-less, which means 1 less thing I have to spend time doing on a regular basis. I need to accelerate that process, actually.
So I'm back on the case. Thank you all for your patience. I apologize for the delay.
Until next time...
I basically spent the weekend having as much fun as possible, first with a trip to Kings Dominion (where I rode almost everything) followed by "Iron Man" in digital projection (which is realistically the only way to see such a movie) and then dinner. What made it special was that one of my really good friends was able to join me and my students for this trip. He credits me with giving him one of the best birthday celebrations he's ever had. That works for me.
Sunday was slower, just hanging out with the same friend over at my best friend's house, eating his fantastic cooking, engaging in great conversation, and just enjoying the beautiful weather in the DC area. Talk about living. Simple pleasures are what its all about.
Anyway, now that I'm back I'm getting into the swing of things and catching up on all the stuff going on around me. Soon, I will be student-less, which means 1 less thing I have to spend time doing on a regular basis. I need to accelerate that process, actually.
So I'm back on the case. Thank you all for your patience. I apologize for the delay.
Until next time...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)