Ladies and gentlemen, you have my apology, because somehow I missed it. Maybe it was the Cosby Trial, the NFL Draft, or the weather.
On further reflection, I’d have to say yes, it was the weather.
Given my borderline obsession with celebrating milestones, I am deeply ashamed of myself that I missed a big one: the 20-year anniversary of the functional end of the four segments of the Banking Act of 1933 – sections that are widely referred to as the Glass-Steagall Act. As most are aware, the key provisions of Glass-Steagall forced the legal separation of financial enterprises that accept deposits and issue loans (i.e. Commercial Banks) from those that engage in trickier activities such as stock/bond issuance, proprietary trading and the like (i.e. Investment Banks). The idea was to put a wall of sobriety around those institutions charged with the responsibility of holding customer cash balances and writing mortgages, while allowing the more energetic and creative among the Wall Street crowd to do pretty much anything else that they wished. At the time, it could be argued that this was a wise move – particularly given the widespread failure of nearly every bank this side of the Bailey Building and Loan in the wake of the ’29 Crash and subsequent Great Depression, and the valid concerns that their failures could be traced to their excessive enthusiasm for more speculative activities.
And for 65 years, it was the law of the land. But it was a pain in the caboose for those forced to comply. Investment Banks such as Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley suffered the indignities of needing separate subsidiaries just to compete in the frigging swaps markets, and banks had to jump through hoops if they wished to even approach sacred realms where stocks and bonds were issued and traded.
The legislative repeal of Glass-Steagall didn’t transpire until mid-1999 (giving me another year to pay obeisance to the 20th), but Sandy couldn’t wait that long. To wit: Sanford I. Weil, then in the midst of converting the prole-like American Can Corporation into the World’s Biggest Financial Colossus – one that just a decade later required taxpayer support to the tune of nearly $0.5 Trillion – was in a great hurry to add an Investment Bank to his portfolio, and wasn’t inclined to wait for the Wheels of Legislation to turn in his favor. So, in April of 1998, he went ahead and purchased venerable I-Bank Salomon Brothers, and that was it. GSS was dead and everyone went about his or her business. The regulatory wall between Commercial and Investment Banking had been shattered by Sandy’s Golden Hammer, and it was game on – even if it took another year to codify the removal of the restriction into the national legal register.
Of course, Sandy had some help. He was a Friend of Bill (Clinton), and, presumably, as homage to this alliance, he likely gave the guy tasked with executing the nation’s laws an amiable heads-up about his intentions (which I’m sure the latter appreciated). In addition, there was Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, who, shortly after he greenlighted Sandy’s power move, landed at Citi’s Co-Chairman seat.
But everything ended up for the best, right? At least for most of the subsequent decade, after which, if memory serves, there were a few problems.
And this type of game of “Inside Baseball” is exactly the type of thing that I believe ails us most: a world where different rules apply to entities with different positioning on the Financial Food Chain.
It was ever thus, and perhaps ever it will be. At present, taxpayers support the whims and predispositions of corporate faves such wonder-boy owned electric car manufacturer, a Farming Industry in which the overalls crowd have long ceded ownership to the folks in Brooks Brothers suits, our gargantuan Energy Companies, and yes, our brilliantly run and ethically unimpeachable Banking Sector.
It seems that our system is generous to everyone but consumer/taxpayers, and recent data suggests that, while they shoulder on, they are arguably losing energy. This week brought a first look at Q1 GDP, which brought tidings of marginal weakness, as did the more obtuse Chicago Fed Index of National Activity:
Perhaps owing to these and other little glitches, the U.S 10 Year Note Yield, after having placed a trepid toe into 3% territory the prior week, has backed off to just under 2.96%. Ags were en fuego, and the USD lifted itself off the carpet a titch.
Most of the investor focus, however was on earnings, and here, somehow, my nearly impeccable prognostications failed me. Far from tanking the quarter, The Big Tech Dogs – particularly the two with the biggest targets on their backs (Facebook and Amazon) absolutely blew the roof off the joint. They also declined to heed my suggestion about the possible benefits of issuing muted guidance. Across the Kingdom of the Gallant 500, with more than half of loyal subjects now having dutifully reported, the blended earnings growth is beating even the rosiest of estimates at a somewhat astonishing >23%.
However, for all of that, it was a flat week for the indices, as investors neglected by and large to embrace the enthusiasm issuing forth from Silicon Valley and elsewhere. Maybe they should teleport themselves to the Continent, where (for reasons unknown to this reporter) a post-Lent rally continues unabated:
European Equities: The Destination of Choice This Spring:
But within these here borders, we’ll be through earnings for all intents and purposes, within two weeks. And all we’ve seen for the last month is a narrowing of the SPX channel to a skinny 100 Index Points:
So let’s for the moment dispatch with the notion that the barking volatility dogs have taken over the junkyard, shall we? Once the Retailers report, we’ll have nothing left to anticipate but some always dodgy macro numbers.
We get a taste of this next Friday, when the April Jobs report drops. It might be well to recall that March was something of a dud – so much so that many economists were forced to resort to the shameful ploy of suggesting we focus on the three-month moving average. As of now, this will require adding the fly 313K Feb number to March’s dismal 103K and whatever comes out Friday, and dividing the whole thing by 3 (glad I could help).
By that time, the Fed will have mailed in its latest Policy Statement (i.e. no Presser), and is not expected to have moved. But at the long end of the curve, hope for a price selloff/yield rise springs eternal, with the volume of speculative shorts in U.S. 10-Year Futures currently resting at record levels.
Maybe they’re right this time, but as I’ve written before, the mighty 10-Year Note has been a tough nut to crack. I reckon that some of these days, we will see higher borrowing costs at the long end of the duration spectrum. After all, I’ve lived through cycles when rates were off the charts and there seemed to be nothing under the sun that could move them in a downward direction. I do suspect, however, that for now,influential politicians who must go back to their districts to beg for money this summer would prefer to not have to explain away a sharp rise in interest rates, and you can place me squarely in the camp of those that believe said politicians have an important say in these matters.
But one way or another, what goes ‘round, come ‘round, and to paraphrase Jerry Garcia/Robert Hunter: “If your Glass was full, may it be again”.
Who knows? Someday they may even re-instate Glass Steagall, and if they do, they can perhaps count on the support of Sandy, who in 2012 said this: “What we should probably do is go and split up investment banking from banking, have banks be deposit takers, have banks make commercial loans and real estate loans, have banks do something that’s not going to risk the taxpayer dollars, that’s not too big to fail,” Sounds like he’s now in favor of a reinstated GS, but, having made his money and gotten out of town before the bad hombres arrived, one can hardly blame him. Surely, he maintains substantial holdings in accounts at large financial institutions, and would be justified in wanting to ensure that they are not engaging in monkey business. As for the rest of us, I reckon we’ll have to take pot luck.
TIMSHEL