Wall Street traders gather to protest bonus drop. Look at their cars...
2007年11月30日 星期五
2007年11月26日 星期一
好歌分享 whitney houston : i will always love you
lyrics:
I will always love you
If I should stay
I would only be in your way
So Ill go, but I know
Ill think of you every step of the way
Chorus:
And I will always love you
I,will always love you
You, my darling you, you
Bitter sweet memories
That is all Im taking with me
So goodbye, please dont cry
We both know Im not what you need
Chorus
I hope life treats you kind
And I hope you have all you dreamed off
And I wish to you joy and happiness
But above all this I wish to you love
Chorus
2007年11月16日 星期五
歡迎留美學人 明炫兄及落雁嫂 11/19 凱旋歸國
歡迎留美學人 明炫兄及落雁嫂, 於本月(11月) 19日星期一, 凱旋歸國.
為感謝明炫兄夫婦對本班及本部落格的支持與貢獻, 在下冒昧代表本班同學已於兩週前買好兩碗落雁嫂指定的'阿宗麵線' 及兩碗'劉山東牛肉麵', 只待兩位學人返抵國門後, 即可立即歡樂享用.
兩位學人如果感覺, 在下敝人我的盛情, 不知何以為報的話, 那就大顆的鑽石買個幾顆,或送些金條 's,金磚 's , 在下都會勉為接受.... 哈.
至於, 我們其他同學還有什麼要款待這兩位學人的也請早日準備, 因為這兩位學人將訂於11月底返回僑居地.
2007年11月14日 星期三
America's Got Talent - Terry Fator
You really do have to look at all five of this guys acts,,,, he is unbelievable.
Watch each of the 5 short movie clips......you won't be sorry....this guy is good....
This guy (??) won $1,000,000.00 on America's Got Talent...and you'll see why!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnVDHzUAj30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTSFhIv9bYg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGH-5-Gvjng
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDoKF1NZ8P8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuoR6OM6KxA&NR=1
Watch each of the 5 short movie clips......you won't be sorry....this guy is good....
This guy (??) won $1,000,000.00 on America's Got Talent...and you'll see why!!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnVDHzUAj30
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTSFhIv9bYg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGH-5-Gvjng
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iDoKF1NZ8P8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CuoR6OM6KxA&NR=1
2007年11月13日 星期二
November 15, 2007
Why FAS 157 strikes dread into bankers
My dear Friends,
I wrote "Please Protect Yourself" on November 4, 2007 at this blog. I think all of you are still totally unprepared for the new FAS 157 rule for the banks. It is all right if you never heard about it. But, this is probably the last chance you can protect your own bank deposite. FAS 157 will be officially announced on November 15, 2007. Therefore, you got to read this article now without any delay. You know what to do with your own money. The bank is just at the corner of the street. Please take a read of the article below:
Protect yourself from the worst and hope for the best. Good luck to all of us.
Just when we hoped the worst was over . . .William Rees-Mogg
We have heard about sub-prime mortgages; we have heard about collateralised debt obligations (CDOs); we have heard about banks writing down their assets; we have heard about global bankers resigning; we have heard about Northern Rock and the first run on a British bank in 140 years.
The risk of a worldwide banking crisis – one that is particularly damaging to mortgages, private equity, hedge funds and the banks themselves – is higher than it was a month ago, and the storm is rising.
This is still an emerging story. It was not until last Wednesday that The Financial Times led on the legal provision that CDOs can be liquidated by the senior holders when they go into default. That could lead to a fire sale of CDOs and still larger defaults.
Yet this, as important as it could be, is not the biggest threat. Few non-bankers have heard of FAS 157 and 159, yet these are the regulations that will set the terms on which the banks will value their assets. The trouble with FAS 157 and 159 is that they are perfectly reasonable regulations in themselves which could have disastrous, though unintended, consequences.
What are FAS 157 and 159? They are the new United States (Federal) accounting standards that have been introduced to regulate the valuation of bank assets. These valuations are of crucial importance because they are the basis of all bank lending: no assets, no lending; no lending, no bank. According to an informative article in The Financial Times, the new standards will apply fully from Thursday. Many US banks have adopted them already. All US quoted banks will have to publish asset figures in conformity with FAS 157 by next spring.
The new rules divide bank assets into three “levels”, according to the freedom with with which they can be bought or sold. Level-one assets, which are easy to value or trade, have to have quoted prices in active markets such as US government bonds or gold bullion. Level two is an intermediate stage; these assets are not as fully marketable as level one, but still sufficiently tradeable to have a definite value.
Level-three assets – usually artificial financial instruments – are the problem. They do not have quoted prices in active markets. They have to be valued by reference to the bank’s own models. According to the analyst Martin Hutchinson, who had analysed some of the US banks, the holdings of level-three assets are substantial. Lehman has $22 billion; Bear Stearns $20 billion; JP Morgan Chase $60 billion. Even these figures may be understated, since the banks have themselves decided whether assets belong to level three or the more acceptable level two, and they have an interest in placing as little in level three and as much in level two as they reasonably can.
Martin Hutchinson has also analysed the assets of Goldman Sachs. The bank has disclosed $72 billion of level-three assets, out of total assets of $900 billion. That seems reasonable enough, but it compares with Goldman Sachs’s capital of $36 billion. Any substantial write off of level-three assets would impact on Goldman Sachs net asset value.
One cannot say that FAS 157 is only an American regulation and the banks of other countries would not therefore be affected. Most global banks already have a listing in the United States that would therefore be subject to US accounting standards. Those that do not will be judged by FAS 157 as the international standard. From now on all major banks will have to declare their assets in the FAS 157 form with its division into different levels by marketability.
No doubt this is the reform that should have been introduced years ago; that would have saved a great deal of agony and some abuse. But FAS 157 is coming into effect at a most inconvenient time. The sub-prime mortgage defaults have already undermined confidence in mortgage banked securities. These form a significant part – perhaps about a quarter – of all level-three assets. Level three also includes higher-quality mortgages and leveraged bridged loans for buyouts.
The global banking system now faces the risk of a general flight towards cash and liquid level one assets on a scale that has not been seen since the early 1930s. Already British banks are showing signs of near panic. I hear of London banks going back on recently agreed loans to parties of good credit, presumably on orders from head office.
There have also been cancellations of offers of credit cards that had already been approved. One need have little sympathy for the US investment banks; they found it profitable to make speculative loans, and now they are paying the price.
Even if ordinary mortgages do continue to be offered – and they are bound to be restricted – sub-prime mortgages will no longer be available for first-time buyers. Yet the housing market depends on people being able to sell their first houses when they trade up to their second. If all banks are anxious to protect their cash reserves, and to reduce their level-three assets, that will make ordinary borrowing difficult and level-three borrowing impossible. Probably the downturn will spread into stock markets, even though it did not originate in stock market speculation.
It is far too late to cancel FAS 157 and 159, even if that were desirable. The concept of different levels for bank assets has been introduced to the banking system and the defaults on sub-prime mortgages have lowered the acceptability of all level-three assets. No one knows what they are worth and hardly anyone wants them.
Commercial banking, with its large customer base, is in better shape than investment banking, but will also be affected. FAS 157 may prove an historic regulatory blunder.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/william_rees_mogg/article2852547.ece
My dear Friends,
I wrote "Please Protect Yourself" on November 4, 2007 at this blog. I think all of you are still totally unprepared for the new FAS 157 rule for the banks. It is all right if you never heard about it. But, this is probably the last chance you can protect your own bank deposite. FAS 157 will be officially announced on November 15, 2007. Therefore, you got to read this article now without any delay. You know what to do with your own money. The bank is just at the corner of the street. Please take a read of the article below:
Protect yourself from the worst and hope for the best. Good luck to all of us.
Just when we hoped the worst was over . . .William Rees-Mogg
We have heard about sub-prime mortgages; we have heard about collateralised debt obligations (CDOs); we have heard about banks writing down their assets; we have heard about global bankers resigning; we have heard about Northern Rock and the first run on a British bank in 140 years.
The risk of a worldwide banking crisis – one that is particularly damaging to mortgages, private equity, hedge funds and the banks themselves – is higher than it was a month ago, and the storm is rising.
This is still an emerging story. It was not until last Wednesday that The Financial Times led on the legal provision that CDOs can be liquidated by the senior holders when they go into default. That could lead to a fire sale of CDOs and still larger defaults.
Yet this, as important as it could be, is not the biggest threat. Few non-bankers have heard of FAS 157 and 159, yet these are the regulations that will set the terms on which the banks will value their assets. The trouble with FAS 157 and 159 is that they are perfectly reasonable regulations in themselves which could have disastrous, though unintended, consequences.
What are FAS 157 and 159? They are the new United States (Federal) accounting standards that have been introduced to regulate the valuation of bank assets. These valuations are of crucial importance because they are the basis of all bank lending: no assets, no lending; no lending, no bank. According to an informative article in The Financial Times, the new standards will apply fully from Thursday. Many US banks have adopted them already. All US quoted banks will have to publish asset figures in conformity with FAS 157 by next spring.
The new rules divide bank assets into three “levels”, according to the freedom with with which they can be bought or sold. Level-one assets, which are easy to value or trade, have to have quoted prices in active markets such as US government bonds or gold bullion. Level two is an intermediate stage; these assets are not as fully marketable as level one, but still sufficiently tradeable to have a definite value.
Level-three assets – usually artificial financial instruments – are the problem. They do not have quoted prices in active markets. They have to be valued by reference to the bank’s own models. According to the analyst Martin Hutchinson, who had analysed some of the US banks, the holdings of level-three assets are substantial. Lehman has $22 billion; Bear Stearns $20 billion; JP Morgan Chase $60 billion. Even these figures may be understated, since the banks have themselves decided whether assets belong to level three or the more acceptable level two, and they have an interest in placing as little in level three and as much in level two as they reasonably can.
Martin Hutchinson has also analysed the assets of Goldman Sachs. The bank has disclosed $72 billion of level-three assets, out of total assets of $900 billion. That seems reasonable enough, but it compares with Goldman Sachs’s capital of $36 billion. Any substantial write off of level-three assets would impact on Goldman Sachs net asset value.
One cannot say that FAS 157 is only an American regulation and the banks of other countries would not therefore be affected. Most global banks already have a listing in the United States that would therefore be subject to US accounting standards. Those that do not will be judged by FAS 157 as the international standard. From now on all major banks will have to declare their assets in the FAS 157 form with its division into different levels by marketability.
No doubt this is the reform that should have been introduced years ago; that would have saved a great deal of agony and some abuse. But FAS 157 is coming into effect at a most inconvenient time. The sub-prime mortgage defaults have already undermined confidence in mortgage banked securities. These form a significant part – perhaps about a quarter – of all level-three assets. Level three also includes higher-quality mortgages and leveraged bridged loans for buyouts.
The global banking system now faces the risk of a general flight towards cash and liquid level one assets on a scale that has not been seen since the early 1930s. Already British banks are showing signs of near panic. I hear of London banks going back on recently agreed loans to parties of good credit, presumably on orders from head office.
There have also been cancellations of offers of credit cards that had already been approved. One need have little sympathy for the US investment banks; they found it profitable to make speculative loans, and now they are paying the price.
Even if ordinary mortgages do continue to be offered – and they are bound to be restricted – sub-prime mortgages will no longer be available for first-time buyers. Yet the housing market depends on people being able to sell their first houses when they trade up to their second. If all banks are anxious to protect their cash reserves, and to reduce their level-three assets, that will make ordinary borrowing difficult and level-three borrowing impossible. Probably the downturn will spread into stock markets, even though it did not originate in stock market speculation.
It is far too late to cancel FAS 157 and 159, even if that were desirable. The concept of different levels for bank assets has been introduced to the banking system and the defaults on sub-prime mortgages have lowered the acceptability of all level-three assets. No one knows what they are worth and hardly anyone wants them.
Commercial banking, with its large customer base, is in better shape than investment banking, but will also be affected. FAS 157 may prove an historic regulatory blunder.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/william_rees_mogg/article2852547.ece
2007年11月12日 星期一
看看厲害的新加坡英文....從1, 2, 到10, 再倒數到1.
Exclusive Singlish Skill...
Even the Englishmen cannot construct sentences using numerals, which is an exclusive skill invented and owned only by Singaporeans.
Ah Beng was asked to construct sentences using 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,and 10... He not only did it to 10, but did it backwards to 1......!!! This was how it was done.
“1 day I go 2 climb up a 3 outside a house to peep. But the couple saw me, so I panic and 4 down. The man rushed out and wanted to 5 with me. I ran until I fell 6 and threw out. So I went into 7 eleven and grabbed some 8 to throw at him. Then I took a 9 and try to stab him. 10 god he ran away!!! So I put the 9 back and paid for the 8 and left 7 eleven. Next day, I called my Boss and say I’m 6. He said 5, tomorrow also no need to come back 4 work. He also told me to climb a 3 and jump down. I don't understand......I so nice 2 him. But I don't know what he 1.
Even the Englishmen cannot construct sentences using numerals, which is an exclusive skill invented and owned only by Singaporeans.
Ah Beng was asked to construct sentences using 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,and 10... He not only did it to 10, but did it backwards to 1......!!! This was how it was done.
“1 day I go 2 climb up a 3 outside a house to peep. But the couple saw me, so I panic and 4 down. The man rushed out and wanted to 5 with me. I ran until I fell 6 and threw out. So I went into 7 eleven and grabbed some 8 to throw at him. Then I took a 9 and try to stab him. 10 god he ran away!!! So I put the 9 back and paid for the 8 and left 7 eleven. Next day, I called my Boss and say I’m 6. He said 5, tomorrow also no need to come back 4 work. He also told me to climb a 3 and jump down. I don't understand......I so nice 2 him. But I don't know what he 1.
2007年11月10日 星期六
文化不同
日本的一家公司要招聘員工，過一段嚴格的面試~ 公司從500多應徵者中選出了5 位佼佼者。 放榜這天，一個叫水原的青年看見榜上沒有自己的名字，悲痛欲死， 回到家中便要切腹自殺，幸好親人及時搶救，水原沒有死成。 正當水原悲傷之時，從公司卻傳來好消息： 水原的成績原是名列前矛的，只是由於電腦的錯誤導致了水原的落選。 正當水原一家人欣喜若望之時，從公司又傳來消息：水原被公司除了名。原因很簡單， 公司老闆說:如此小的挫折都受不了，這樣的人在公司是不成什麼大事的。
******************
美國的一家公司要招聘員工，過一段嚴格的面試~ 公司從500多應徵者中選出了5 位佼佼者。 放榜這天，一個叫湯姆的青年看見榜上沒有自己的名字，悲痛欲死， 回到家中便要舉槍自盡，幸好親人及時搶救，湯姆沒有死成。 正當湯姆悲傷之時，從公司卻傳來好消息：湯姆的成績原是名列前矛的， 只是由於電腦的錯誤導致了湯姆的落選。 正當湯姆一家人欣喜若望之時，美國各大州的之知名律師都來到湯姆的家中， 他們千方百計的鼓動湯姆到法院告這家公司，聲稱需支付巨額的精神賠償， 並自告奮勇的充當湯姆的律師。
***********************
德國的一家公司要招聘員工，過一段嚴格的面試~ 公司從 500 多應徵者中選出了5 位佼佼者。 放榜這天，一個叫蕭恩的青年看見榜上沒有自己的名字，悲痛欲死，回到家中便要跳河自殺，幸好親人及時搶救，蕭恩沒有死成。 正當蕭恩悲傷之時，從公司卻傳來好消息：蕭恩的成績原是名列前矛的，只是由於電腦的錯誤導致了蕭恩的落選。正當蕭恩欣喜若望之時，蕭恩的父母卻堅決反對自己的兒子進入這家公司。 他們的理由不容置疑：這家公司作業效率如此差勁，進入這家公司對兒子的成績毫無益處。
*********************
中國的一家公司要招聘員工，過一段嚴格的面試， 公司從500多應徵者中選出了5 位佼佼者。 放榜這天，一個叫志強的青年看見榜上沒有自己的名字，悲痛欲死， 回到家中便要懸樑自盡，幸好親人及時搶救，志強沒有死成。 正當志強悲傷之時，從公司卻傳來好消息：志強的成績原是名列前矛的，只是由於電腦的錯誤導致了志強的落選。正當志強欣喜若望之時，志強的父母來到公司，一看到公司老闆便跪了下來， 他們含淚的說真多虧你救了我兒子，我們家世世代代感謝你的大恩大德！
**************************
台灣的一家公司要招聘員工，過一段嚴格的面試， 公司從500多應徵者中選出了5 位佼佼者。放榜這天， 一個叫俊傑的青年看見榜上沒有自己的名字，悲痛欲死， 回到家中便要磕藥自殺，幸好親人及時搶救，俊傑沒有死成。 正當俊傑悲傷之時，從公司卻傳來好消息：俊傑的成績原是名列前矛的，只是由於電腦的錯誤導致了俊傑的落選。正當傑欣喜若望之時， 媒體大幅報導此事，並邀請俊傑參加各種CALL IN評論及綜藝節目， 全國輿論熱烈討論電腦為何會出錯，是否有黑道介入或官商勾結， 至於俊傑到底有沒有去該公司上班，根本沒有人關心...
******************
美國的一家公司要招聘員工，過一段嚴格的面試~ 公司從500多應徵者中選出了5 位佼佼者。 放榜這天，一個叫湯姆的青年看見榜上沒有自己的名字，悲痛欲死， 回到家中便要舉槍自盡，幸好親人及時搶救，湯姆沒有死成。 正當湯姆悲傷之時，從公司卻傳來好消息：湯姆的成績原是名列前矛的， 只是由於電腦的錯誤導致了湯姆的落選。 正當湯姆一家人欣喜若望之時，美國各大州的之知名律師都來到湯姆的家中， 他們千方百計的鼓動湯姆到法院告這家公司，聲稱需支付巨額的精神賠償， 並自告奮勇的充當湯姆的律師。
***********************
德國的一家公司要招聘員工，過一段嚴格的面試~ 公司從 500 多應徵者中選出了5 位佼佼者。 放榜這天，一個叫蕭恩的青年看見榜上沒有自己的名字，悲痛欲死，回到家中便要跳河自殺，幸好親人及時搶救，蕭恩沒有死成。 正當蕭恩悲傷之時，從公司卻傳來好消息：蕭恩的成績原是名列前矛的，只是由於電腦的錯誤導致了蕭恩的落選。正當蕭恩欣喜若望之時，蕭恩的父母卻堅決反對自己的兒子進入這家公司。 他們的理由不容置疑：這家公司作業效率如此差勁，進入這家公司對兒子的成績毫無益處。
*********************
中國的一家公司要招聘員工，過一段嚴格的面試， 公司從500多應徵者中選出了5 位佼佼者。 放榜這天，一個叫志強的青年看見榜上沒有自己的名字，悲痛欲死， 回到家中便要懸樑自盡，幸好親人及時搶救，志強沒有死成。 正當志強悲傷之時，從公司卻傳來好消息：志強的成績原是名列前矛的，只是由於電腦的錯誤導致了志強的落選。正當志強欣喜若望之時，志強的父母來到公司，一看到公司老闆便跪了下來， 他們含淚的說真多虧你救了我兒子，我們家世世代代感謝你的大恩大德！
**************************
台灣的一家公司要招聘員工，過一段嚴格的面試， 公司從500多應徵者中選出了5 位佼佼者。放榜這天， 一個叫俊傑的青年看見榜上沒有自己的名字，悲痛欲死， 回到家中便要磕藥自殺，幸好親人及時搶救，俊傑沒有死成。 正當俊傑悲傷之時，從公司卻傳來好消息：俊傑的成績原是名列前矛的，只是由於電腦的錯誤導致了俊傑的落選。正當傑欣喜若望之時， 媒體大幅報導此事，並邀請俊傑參加各種CALL IN評論及綜藝節目， 全國輿論熱烈討論電腦為何會出錯，是否有黑道介入或官商勾結， 至於俊傑到底有沒有去該公司上班，根本沒有人關心...
2007年11月6日 星期二
花東之旅
I came across these videos by accident:
20070921花東之旅(上)
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?ei=UTF-8&gid=787082&vid=1231513&b=2
20070921花東之旅(中)
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?gid=787082&b=1&vid=1236585&p=
20070921花東之旅(下)
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?ei=UTF-8&p=&gid=787082&vid=1237373&b=0
There are several other videos are pretty good too.
20070921花東之旅(上)
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?ei=UTF-8&gid=787082&vid=1231513&b=2
20070921花東之旅(中)
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?gid=787082&b=1&vid=1236585&p=
20070921花東之旅(下)
http://video.yahoo.com/video/play?ei=UTF-8&p=&gid=787082&vid=1237373&b=0
There are several other videos are pretty good too.
2007年11月5日 星期一
On my way to Hong Kong
Visit my son's dorm
Visited my son's dorm at school recently. Share the picture with you.
My son, open-mouthed zombie, in the back with wild-girls zombies and Indiana Jones. Please introduce normal girl friend to him. I am so worry. (Halloween at dorm's hallway)
2007年11月4日 星期日
Please Protect Yourself
THE BEAR'S LAIR
Level 3 storm about to hit Wall Street
By Martin Hutchinson
There's a mystery on Wall Street. Merrill Lynch wrote off $8.4 billion in its subprime mortgage business, a figure revised up from $4.9 billion, yet Goldman Sachs reported an excellent quarter and didn't feel the need for any write-offs. The real secret of the difference is likely to be in the details of their accounting, and in particular in the murky world, shortly to be revealed, of their "Level
3" asset portfolios.
Both Merrill and Goldman have Harvard chairmen - Merrill's Stan O'Neal from Harvard Business School and Goldman's Lloyd Blankfein from Harvard College and Harvard Law School. Thus it's pretty unlikely their approaches to business are significantly different - or is a Harvard MBA really worth minus $8.4 billion compared with a law degree? (The special case of George W Bush may be disregarded in answering that question.)
We may be about to find out. From November 15, we will have a new tool for figuring out how much toxic waste is in investment banks' balance sheets. The new US accounting rule SFAS157 requires banks to divide their tradable assets into three "levels" according to how easy it is to get a market price for them. Level 1 assets have quoted prices in active markets. At the other extreme Level 3 assets have only unobservable inputs to measure value and are thus valued by reference to the banks' own models.
Goldman Sachs has disclosed its Level 3 assets, two quarters before it would be compelled to do so in the period ending February 29, 2008. Their total was $72 billion, which at first sight looks reasonable because it is only 8% of total assets. However the problem becomes more serious when you realize that $72 billion is twice Goldman's capital of $36 billion. In an extreme situation therefore, Goldman's entire existence rests on the value of its Level 3 assets.
The same presumably applies to other major investment banks - since they employ traders and risk managers with similar educations, operating in a similar culture, they probably have Level 3 assets of around twice capital. Citigroup, J P Morgan Chase and Bank of America may have less since their culture is different; before 1999 those institutions were pure commercial banks and a substantial part of their business still lies in retail commercial banking, an area in which the investment banks are not represented and Level 3 assets are scarce.
There has been no rush to disclose Level 3 assets in advance of the first quarter in which it becomes compulsory, probably that ending in February or March 2008. Figures that have been disclosed show Lehman with $22 billion in Level 3 assets, 100% of capital, Bear Stearns with $20 billion, 155% of capital, and J P Morgan Chase with about $60 billion, 50% of capital. However those figures are almost certainly low; the border between Level 2 and Level 3 is a fuzzy one and it is unquestionably in the interest of banks to classify as many of their assets as possible as Level 2, where analysts won't worry about them, rather than Level 3, where analyst concern is likely....more
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/IK03Dj03.html
Level 3 storm about to hit Wall Street
By Martin Hutchinson
There's a mystery on Wall Street. Merrill Lynch wrote off $8.4 billion in its subprime mortgage business, a figure revised up from $4.9 billion, yet Goldman Sachs reported an excellent quarter and didn't feel the need for any write-offs. The real secret of the difference is likely to be in the details of their accounting, and in particular in the murky world, shortly to be revealed, of their "Level
3" asset portfolios.
Both Merrill and Goldman have Harvard chairmen - Merrill's Stan O'Neal from Harvard Business School and Goldman's Lloyd Blankfein from Harvard College and Harvard Law School. Thus it's pretty unlikely their approaches to business are significantly different - or is a Harvard MBA really worth minus $8.4 billion compared with a law degree? (The special case of George W Bush may be disregarded in answering that question.)
We may be about to find out. From November 15, we will have a new tool for figuring out how much toxic waste is in investment banks' balance sheets. The new US accounting rule SFAS157 requires banks to divide their tradable assets into three "levels" according to how easy it is to get a market price for them. Level 1 assets have quoted prices in active markets. At the other extreme Level 3 assets have only unobservable inputs to measure value and are thus valued by reference to the banks' own models.
Goldman Sachs has disclosed its Level 3 assets, two quarters before it would be compelled to do so in the period ending February 29, 2008. Their total was $72 billion, which at first sight looks reasonable because it is only 8% of total assets. However the problem becomes more serious when you realize that $72 billion is twice Goldman's capital of $36 billion. In an extreme situation therefore, Goldman's entire existence rests on the value of its Level 3 assets.
The same presumably applies to other major investment banks - since they employ traders and risk managers with similar educations, operating in a similar culture, they probably have Level 3 assets of around twice capital. Citigroup, J P Morgan Chase and Bank of America may have less since their culture is different; before 1999 those institutions were pure commercial banks and a substantial part of their business still lies in retail commercial banking, an area in which the investment banks are not represented and Level 3 assets are scarce.
There has been no rush to disclose Level 3 assets in advance of the first quarter in which it becomes compulsory, probably that ending in February or March 2008. Figures that have been disclosed show Lehman with $22 billion in Level 3 assets, 100% of capital, Bear Stearns with $20 billion, 155% of capital, and J P Morgan Chase with about $60 billion, 50% of capital. However those figures are almost certainly low; the border between Level 2 and Level 3 is a fuzzy one and it is unquestionably in the interest of banks to classify as many of their assets as possible as Level 2, where analysts won't worry about them, rather than Level 3, where analyst concern is likely....more
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/IK03Dj03.html
2007年11月1日 星期四
這個經理很厲害....看他如何寫員工的評量表....哈
The following is an appraisal of a manager of his subordinate, Bob Smith. It was an open appraisal done face to face. This was what Bob’s manager wrote:
01. Bob Smith, my assistant programmer, can always be found
02. hard at work in his cubicle. Bob works independently, without
03. wasting company time talking to colleagues. Bob never
04. thinks twice about assisting fellow employees, and he always
05. finishes given assignments on time. Often he takes extended
06. measures to complete his work, sometimes skipping coffee
07. breaks. Bob is a dedicated individual who has absolutely no
08. vanity in spite of his high accomplishments and profound
09. knowledge in his field. I firmly believe that Bob can be
10. classed as a high-caliber employee, the type which cannot be
11. dispensed with. Consequently, I duly recommend that Bob be
12. promoted to executive management, and a proposal will be
13. executed as soon as possible.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
The appraisal speaks well of Bob Smith; where in fact the Bob Smith is not of the calibre as described. So the appraisor sent this foot note to the Human Resource Manager.
Footnote To The Human Resources Department: Bob Smith was standing over my shoulder while I wrote the report sent to you earlier today. Kindly read only the odd numbered lines only.
01. Bob Smith, my assistant programmer, can always be found
02. hard at work in his cubicle. Bob works independently, without
03. wasting company time talking to colleagues. Bob never
04. thinks twice about assisting fellow employees, and he always
05. finishes given assignments on time. Often he takes extended
06. measures to complete his work, sometimes skipping coffee
07. breaks. Bob is a dedicated individual who has absolutely no
08. vanity in spite of his high accomplishments and profound
09. knowledge in his field. I firmly believe that Bob can be
10. classed as a high-caliber employee, the type which cannot be
11. dispensed with. Consequently, I duly recommend that Bob be
12. promoted to executive management, and a proposal will be
13. executed as soon as possible.
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
...
The appraisal speaks well of Bob Smith; where in fact the Bob Smith is not of the calibre as described. So the appraisor sent this foot note to the Human Resource Manager.
Footnote To The Human Resources Department: Bob Smith was standing over my shoulder while I wrote the report sent to you earlier today. Kindly read only the odd numbered lines only.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)