華爾街再現(xiàn)金融危機(jī)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)!
????沒(méi)有人想重溫2007-2008年金融危機(jī)那段水深火熱的日子。美國(guó)最大的數(shù)家銀行競(jìng)相爭(zhēng)取緊急救助,房地產(chǎn)市場(chǎng)崩潰,數(shù)百萬(wàn)人失業(yè)。華爾街(Wall Street)最終獲救,小企業(yè)和平民百姓卻為此支付了高昂的代價(jià)。 ????危機(jī)過(guò)后,為了避免另一場(chǎng)災(zāi)難,美國(guó)通過(guò)了新的金融法規(guī)。一切似乎意味著人們已經(jīng)汲取了教訓(xùn)。但是,事實(shí)果真如此嗎? ????金融業(yè)如今已經(jīng)從陷入困境的借款人帶來(lái)的巨額損失中恢復(fù)了元?dú)?,又飄飄然起來(lái)。美國(guó)各大銀行在剔除最危險(xiǎn)的資產(chǎn)、清理資產(chǎn)負(fù)債表之后,大多數(shù)都通過(guò)了年度壓力測(cè)試。投資者當(dāng)然注意到了這一情況。今年到目前為止,標(biāo)準(zhǔn)普爾500指數(shù)(Standard & Poor's 500)的金融類(lèi)成分股已經(jīng)上漲了16%,高于總指數(shù)的漲幅(9%)。美國(guó)銀行(Bank of America) 的股價(jià)更是飆漲了59.3%,成為漲幅僅次于西爾斯百貨公司(Sears)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)普爾500指數(shù)成分股。 ????但是,與金融危機(jī)爆發(fā)前幾年那些臭名昭著的特征非常類(lèi)似的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)似乎正緩慢回潮。美聯(lián)儲(chǔ)(the Federal Reserve)的寬松貨幣政策可能刺激了投資,在理想狀況下,這些投資又將反過(guò)來(lái)促進(jìn)經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)。但代價(jià)是什么呢? ????以下四個(gè)跡象顯示,風(fēng)險(xiǎn)正在重返華爾街: 高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)借款人重新獲得貸款 ????對(duì)于一些貸款人來(lái)說(shuō),麻煩纏身的借款人似乎已經(jīng)不再令它們感到困擾。 ????第一資本公司(Capital One)和通用金融公司(GM Financial )又開(kāi)始引誘那些僅僅幾年前金融機(jī)構(gòu)還避之唯恐不及的高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)借款人?!都~約時(shí)報(bào)》(The New York Times)最近報(bào)道稱(chēng):去年12月份,信用卡貸款人向信用受損的借款人發(fā)行了110萬(wàn)張新卡,比上年增長(zhǎng)了12.3%。 ????我們可以從不同的角度來(lái)看待這一增長(zhǎng)。首先,正如《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》所指出的,它對(duì)更宏觀層面的經(jīng)濟(jì)是否有利值得懷疑。消費(fèi)者是否已經(jīng)做好了準(zhǔn)備,承擔(dān)更沉重的債務(wù)?失業(yè)率依然高企。數(shù)百萬(wàn)人背負(fù)的抵押貸款依然高于其房屋的現(xiàn)有價(jià)值。這些顯然都引發(fā)了道德問(wèn)題。 ????與此同時(shí),它也反映出銀行現(xiàn)在正在適應(yīng)新型的借款人。各大銀行逐漸意識(shí)到,鑒于這場(chǎng)金融危機(jī)甚至把信譽(yù)最好的借款人也逼到了喪失贖回權(quán)的境地,它們不可能永遠(yuǎn)把那些帶有信用污點(diǎn)的人拒之門(mén)外。當(dāng)然,發(fā)放抵押貸款時(shí),銀行依然在執(zhí)行嚴(yán)厲的放貸標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。但德勤咨詢(xún)公司(Deloitte)表示,對(duì)于貸款人來(lái)說(shuō),駁回“首次欠款人(first-time defaulter)”的貸款申請(qǐng)將是一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤之舉——倘若不是因?yàn)槭艽溯喗?jīng)濟(jì)衰退的影響,他們?cè)究梢砸恢北3至己玫男庞糜涗?。德勤在去年夏天發(fā)布的一份報(bào)告中建議:“首次欠款人群體可以成為金融機(jī)構(gòu)一個(gè)獨(dú)特的創(chuàng)收機(jī)會(huì)?!?/p> ????德勤公司或許認(rèn)為這個(gè)機(jī)會(huì)是“獨(dú)特的”,但各大銀行很有可能視其為“必需的”。畢竟,它們正在想方設(shè)法彌補(bǔ)因新的金融法規(guī)而喪失的數(shù)十億美元交易費(fèi)收入。因此,它們把(收取相對(duì)較高的利率和滯納金)信用卡作為解決問(wèn)題的辦法,我們實(shí)在不必感到驚訝。 ? |
????Nobody wants to relive the height of the 2007-2008 financial crisis. The biggest banks scrambled for federal aid, the housing market crashed, and millions lost their jobs. Wall Street was saved, and Main Street paid dearly for it. ????In the wake of the crisis, new financial regulations were passed to help avoid another disaster. This might suggest Americans have learned their lessons. Or have we? ????The finance industry is starting to feel better about business again, having recovered from huge losses made to troubled borrowers. Most of America's largest banks passed their annual stress test after unloading their riskiest assets and cleaning up their balance sheets. And investors have certainly taken notice. So far this year, shares of financial companies listed on the Standard & Poor's 500 index have risen 16%, higher than the overall index's rise of 9%. Bank of America (BAC) stock, in particular, has rallied 59.3%, becoming S&P's second-biggest gainer next to Sears (SHLD). ????But similar risks that infamously defined the years leading up to the financial crisis appear to be slowly creeping back. The Federal Reserve's cheap money policy may have spurred investments, which in turn would ideally help the economy grow. But at what cost? ????Here are four signs that risk is back on Wall Street: Risky borrowers get loan offers ????For some lenders, troubled borrowers no longer seem as troubled. ????Capital One (COF) and GM Financial are luring back riskier borrowers that financial institutions turned away only a few years ago, The New York Times recently reported. In December, credit card lenders issued 1.1 million new cards to borrowers with damaged credit, a 12.3% increase over the previous year. ????There are a few ways to look at the rise. For one, as the Times points out, it's questionable if it's even good for the broader economy. Are consumers even ready to take on more debt? Unemployment is high. Millions are still chained to mortgages worth more than their homes. This clearly raises ethical issues. ????Meanwhile, it also reflects banks responding to a new profile of borrowers. They've begun to realize they can't always turn down people with credit blemishes, given that the financial crisis has pushed even the most creditworthy borrowers into foreclosure. Of course, lending standards for mortgages remain tight, but the consultancy Deloitte has suggested that it would be a mistake for lenders to dismiss "first-time defaulters," who otherwise would be in good credit standing if it weren't for the recession. In a report released last summer, Deloitte recommended: "Targeting this segment of first-time defaulters could become a unique revenue opportunity for institutions." ????Deloitte might see it as "unique," but it's likely that banks just see it as necessary. After all, they're looking to make up billions of dollars in fees lost by new financial regulations. So it's really no surprise that credit cards, which charge relatively high interest rates and late fees, could be one answer. |