Go Back   IceInSpace > General Astronomy > General Chat

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
  #1  
Old 26-10-2009, 08:58 AM
DJDD
Registered User

DJDD is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 936
Derivatives- say what?

I was listening to one fo the ABC radio stations yesterday and heard an interview with a UK banker (?) talkign abotu derivatives and hwo they should not be heavily regulated.

I did not really understand it as I had just heard about derivatives but decided that they should be more heavily regulated just because the guy was:
(a) a financier of some sort; and
(b) did not like the idea of regulation because then then they could not move money around so easily (of course, he made ti sound like it helped everyone when they used them)

anyway, I read more about it online, still did not really understand derivatives (lots of gobbledook, even wikipedia), and then read this gem:
http://billsandiego.blogspot.com/200...explained.html

and it cleared it all up.

there may be some use for them but at the end of the day, weighing pros against cons, maybe they should be heavily regulated or, dare I say it, banned?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 26-10-2009, 10:45 AM
Baddad's Avatar
Baddad (Marty)
Teknition

Baddad is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Brisbane Australia
Posts: 1,721
Hi DJDD,

That is crooked. I agree with you. Should be banned. Its transactions like that that cause depresions/recessions.

Paper money is bad economics.

Cheers Marty
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 26-10-2009, 10:51 AM
casstony
Registered User

casstony is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Warragul, Vic
Posts: 4,494
From Nathan's Economic Edge:

"JPM holds more than $80 TRILLION worth of derivatives.
Those who think that the financial crisis is over are simply living with their noses buried in the sand. The large banks and the government are complicit in trying to hide the rotting smell. Their fraud and deception are going to be the end of both..."

My impression is that we either do a few tough years now and reduce debt, or we condemn our kids to a few tough decades and another world war ............sorry kids, you lose.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 26-10-2009, 11:23 AM
Bobbyoutback's Avatar
Bobbyoutback
Registered User

Bobbyoutback is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Broken Hill
Posts: 376
I trade CFDs ( contracts for difference ) a form of derivative , the word derivative means derived from .
CFDs are highly geared & although the rewards can be spectacular the losses can be monstrous !

Be careful out there .
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 26-10-2009, 02:13 PM
Ian Robinson
Registered User

Ian Robinson is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Gateshead
Posts: 2,205
Damb right derivatives should be regulated , a lot the financial problems in the USA, UK, and elsewhere last year that led to melt down were due to greed and unregulated speculation in the markets.

IMO , derivatives should be outlawed.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 26-10-2009, 05:36 PM
Waxing_Gibbous's Avatar
Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)
Grumpy Old Man-Child

Waxing_Gibbous is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: South Gippsland
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian Robinson View Post
Damb right derivatives should be regulated , a lot the financial problems in the USA, UK, and elsewhere last year that led to melt down were due to greed and unregulated speculation in the markets.

IMO , derivatives should be outlawed.
Err. No. They should not!
They should be regulated no more than they are, but regulators should pay far more attention to the financial solvency of the holders.
Derivatives have been around since Babylonian times. They are an essential part of any economy, Capitalist, Socialist, even Communist.
Derivatives, as pointed out, derive their value from an underlying asset (currencies, mortgages, oil, greasy wool, grain, gold contract etc etc), anything for which their is a major market).
The two most common types of derivative are:

Futures - a legally binding contract to buy or sell an asset at a price mutually agreed. For instance anyone who's bought $10000 worth of gear in the last 18 months could have instead bought a future in US$ agreeing to buy them now at say 89 cents, when they were at 78 cents. You'd be ahead.
Of course it could have gone the other way and you'd be stuck. Your exposure is the difference either way.

If you'd bet on the AU$ to fall and bought a contract to sell, you would have been "short selling". Boo. Hiss, I hear. Wrong! Wrong! Wrong! Tell you why in a minute.

The second most common type is called an 'Option'
An option is just that. You purchase the right to purchse an asset at a certain time for a certain price.
The main difference is that an option is not a contract, you have no exposure beyond the price you originally paid.

Financial derivatives (swaps, exchanges eyc) are VERY complex instruments, often tied up with the value of other derivatives.
This was one of the major problems of the GFC. Banks, seeking higher and higher returns opted to take positions on derivatives that were based on 'sub-prime' mortgages.

But this was not THE cause. Many other factors came into play years before the GFC. A declining US "real" economy, that was largely hidden by all the speculation on Wall Street was the principal cause.
Greed and ignorance were pretty high up there as well. And I don't just blame the Banks.
Mom & Pop have no business in financial markets. If you haven't got time to monitor your investments or broker, or the markets in general, you should just shove it in the bank or buy a decent rental property. Stay away from the market unless you are prepared to lose. Its just like horse racing. A lot of negative publicity and venom has been directed at hedge funds.
But these were the people everyone SHOULD have been listening to!
Their portfolios made up largely of "shorts" should have set the alarm bells wringing months before the crash. A quick look would have shown the negative opnion these massive funds had of the Financial sector. They are a massively important corrective indicator, before any "corrections" actually happen. The more 'shorts' you see in the market, the more you should pay attention!

But herd behaviour on the part of investors, corporate and retail, meant that more and more cash went into buying derivatives that, had anyone taken a good look, would have been seen as worthless. Nobody believed the bubble would burst. Despite historical evidence to the contrary.

To summarise: just about everything we take for granted is coverned by commodities exchanges. When BHP sells X dollars worth of Iron ore to China, it will likely take out an long option on US$, in case the price falls. China will do the reverse.
When we sell our products o'seas or buy from abroad in any quantity we do the same thing.

As I said these are just the two basic types of derivatives, They can become very, very complicated - to the point were the broker and traders don't really know how they work, they've just benn given a set of parameters under which to trade.
So: Yes derivatives should be regulated, but certainly not banned. At the end of the day, Caveat Emptor, must apply.
My .02$ which I'll trade you for .03euros for Jan 31/10 delivery.
PJH
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 26-10-2009, 06:41 PM
Starkler's Avatar
Starkler (Geoff)
4000 post club member

Starkler is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,900
Tell me what business does anyone other than a primary producer or a food company have in trading wheat futures? Parties other than oil producers/industrial consumers in oil futures etc?

Its speculation for speculations sake, which is the art of profiting from market inefficiencies whilst value adding absolutely nothing, and when you're a big enough entity to move and manipulate markets to your advantage its truly parasitic!

The purpose of a bank is to be a conduit between those requiring loans, and those with capital to lend.

Investment banks creating money and then distorting markets with it to their own ends is predatory, parasitic and serves nobodies interests but their own.

/rant

Last edited by Starkler; 26-10-2009 at 07:05 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 26-10-2009, 07:13 PM
Nesti (Mark)
Registered User

Nesti is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by casstony View Post
From Nathan's Economic Edge:

"JPM holds more than $80 TRILLION worth of derivatives.
Those who think that the financial crisis is over are simply living with their noses buried in the sand. The large banks and the government are complicit in trying to hide the rotting smell. Their fraud and deception are going to be the end of both..."

My impression is that we either do a few tough years now and reduce debt, or we condemn our kids to a few tough decades and another world war ............sorry kids, you lose.
The total derivative market is US$600 Trillion. It is now believed to be almost entirely toxic...leveraged far worse than the US housing market.

Why worse? Well, unlike a house, really, people can only own 100% of a property. BUT, in the derivatives market, securitization of assets can be leveraged. This means that for every real share out there, there could be 2 or 3 real owners who on paper own 100% of it.

If it unwinds, and it WILL if there's a run on the US dollar, a market 10 x the global GDP will make the stock market, housing market and Dot Com market bubbles seem like dropping $20 on the floor.

Cheers
Mark
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 26-10-2009, 10:49 PM
Kal's Avatar
Kal (Andrew)
1¼" ñì®våñá

Kal is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,845
Funny you should mention options. Myself and a few other employees where I work got a letter in the mail recently regarding "non qualified stock options" granted back in 1999 that are about to expire. We each have no idea of what we got it for, possibly when compaq bought DEC (although that was 1998)


*shrugs*

I am in the process of exercising that option now, I should get a bit over $1000 for it. Just wish I knew why lol
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 26-10-2009, 10:50 PM
Kal's Avatar
Kal (Andrew)
1¼" ñì®våñá

Kal is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,845
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starkler View Post
Investment banks creating money and then distorting markets with it to their own ends is predatory, parasitic and serves nobodies interests but their own.
amen!
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 27-10-2009, 01:32 PM
Waxing_Gibbous's Avatar
Waxing_Gibbous (Peter)
Grumpy Old Man-Child

Waxing_Gibbous is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: South Gippsland
Posts: 1,768
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starkler View Post
Tell me what business does anyone other than a primary producer or a food company have in trading wheat futures? Parties other than oil producers/industrial consumers in oil futures etc?

Its speculation for speculations sake, which is the art of profiting from market inefficiencies whilst value adding absolutely nothing, and when you're a big enough entity to move and manipulate markets to your advantage its truly parasitic!

The purpose of a bank is to be a conduit between those requiring loans, and those with capital to lend.

Investment banks creating money and then distorting markets with it to their own ends is predatory, parasitic and serves nobodies interests but their own.

/rant
Partly true and I partly agree.
Curiously, most commodity exchanges are actually on behalf of primary producers and secondary processors. The amount of speculation by 3rd parties is actually only about 3% +/-.
Real estate speculation is far more damaging to the average person. But would you deny someone the right to buy a rental property or lease out a shop?

A bank's raisonne d'etre is the same as any other company's: to make money for its shareholders, any benefit accrued by the customer is, technically, an irrelevance. Shareholders generally demand a return of 8-10% minimum before they invest. No shareholders. No bank.
So High Street banks only loan you money to make money for the people who put money IN, in the first place. They are only nice to you to get hold of your $$$ so they can make more.

An investment bank is a different matter. Unless you burst through the door with a cool million or two in your purse, you're unlikely to get further than the front step.
They do not deal in high street bank's business. Their job is to direct large amounts of capital into investments for clients and, importantly, to make markets - that is stimulate various sectors of an economy in order to produce profit.
Granted, some of the biggest were woefully bad at it, getting it hopelessly wrong and in some cases criminally negligent.
We're back to regulation again. The US banking system is one of the most heavily tegulated in the world. But under the Bush administration the whole free-wheeling-cowboy, yee-haa, lets make billions. buy-now-pay-never policies, seriously undermined the authority of the SEC & the FDC. Laisse-Faire capitalism of the worst kind become the order of the day.

End result: Global financial meltdown. But not because of the system itself, rather a failure to govern and a failure to comprehend.
Its worth reading Adam Smith's seminal work The Wealth of Nations' written in the 18th century.
As they say on Bttlestar Galactica-"All this has happend before. All this will happen again!"
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 27-10-2009, 05:24 PM
FredSnerd (Claude)
Registered User

FredSnerd is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Canberra
Posts: 474
Quote:
Originally Posted by Waxing_Gibbous View Post
We're back to regulation again. The US banking system is one of the most heavily tegulated in the world.

End result: Global financial meltdown. But not because of the system itself, rather a failure to govern and a failure to comprehend.
If the US banking system is one of the most heavily regulated in the world it is clearly not regulated enough.

As to the second remark, for the last decade and a half we watched governments all over the world dismantle the regulatory system so the wealthy elite could make their $$$ quick and dirty without restraint. The result. They have brought the system to the brink of disaster and now were to be told that the fault for all this lies with the regulators. What $#@!. The system is to blame and we need a democracy that servers the people and not the few greedy capitalists that would sell their own grand mothers for a few bucks and then blame everyone else for not stopping them from doing it.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 27-10-2009, 06:07 PM
Rod66 (Rod)
Rod

Rod66 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 129
My my, what a pretty mess this really is. I just want to buy a house, food and clothing for my family and watch the stars..Isn't it interesting how the greedy have invented so many ways to make money from the same thing. So how do we make a society that doesn't need money? Do we have to get rid of the greed first?

Rod
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 27-10-2009, 07:10 PM
Starkler's Avatar
Starkler (Geoff)
4000 post club member

Starkler is offline
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,900
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rod66 View Post
Isn't it interesting how the greedy have invented so many ways to make money from the same thing. So how do we make a society that doesn't need money? Do we have to get rid of the greed first?

Rod
Indeed it is. Those with the capital demand continuous exponential growth.
What globalisation has brought us is a situation where advanced economies such as Australia, Uk and Usa have all but priced themselves out of actually producing anything other than what can be dug from the ground.

In lieu of actual production, what we have is the illusion of wealth growth driven by exponential growth in credit.

This chart shows the story of whats really been happening since the expansion of credit in the early 80's.
Exponential credit growth has been required to give us linear gdp growth.

US consumers already have hit the wall. Without real income rises, no more credit can be taken on. The only sector where credit is now growing is government.

A major crash has to happen to purge the system. No it hasn't happened yet. The longer we have to wait for it, the worse its going to be.

Chart sourced from http://market-ticker.denninger.net/
Attached Thumbnails
Click for full-size image (IncomeAssetsAndDebt.jpg)
67.2 KB14 views

Last edited by Starkler; 27-10-2009 at 07:24 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 27-10-2009, 07:41 PM
Rod66 (Rod)
Rod

Rod66 is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 129
So in order to "reset" the system, why not declare these big institutions insolvent then start new ones up operating under vastly different regulations?
At this stage inflation has to keep going up in order to make the value of the loans today look quite small in ten years time so that the money we earn in ten years time can keep up with the interest payments on the debt we have today. Its whether we are still earning any money in ten years that determines if we're still able to pay it off. When the earning stops, then the debt comes crashing down because it can't be repaid, then the govt steps in and then the system gets artificially inflated and hence we have what is occuring now - a bubble due to govt influence. What happens when the govt stops earning money... Someone ask the third world countries that have uncontrollable debt...

Remember its confidence that causes crashes, not any particular level of debt or statistic that says it should happen. Pray for calm people...
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 28-10-2009, 12:13 AM
Bobbyoutback's Avatar
Bobbyoutback
Registered User

Bobbyoutback is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Broken Hill
Posts: 376
Humans are naturally a manipulate species , in the financial world the predators are manifest .

When the market was going down down" some superannuation funds lend stocks to brokers for a fee who then at a fee supplied certain hedge funds , the hedge funds then shorted those stocks to drive down the price so to be able to buy back at the lower price for great profit , the original suppliers then got back the stock .


Legal but stinks

Bobby.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 28-10-2009, 12:24 AM
Nesti (Mark)
Registered User

Nesti is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbyoutback View Post
Humans are naturally a manipulate species , in the financial world the predators are manifest .

When the market was going down down" some superannuation funds lend stocks to brokers for a fee who then at a fee supplied certain hedge funds , the hedge funds then shorted those stocks to drive down the price so to be able to buy back at the lower price for great profit , the original suppliers then got back the stock .


Legal but stinks

Bobby.

They will short sell and naked short sell their own dollar into oblivion when the time comes.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 28-10-2009, 12:33 AM
Astro78's Avatar
Astro78
Tripping in Space

Astro78 is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 500
Quote:
Originally Posted by Starkler View Post
Tell me what business does anyone other than a primary producer or a food company have in trading wheat futures? Parties other than oil producers/industrial consumers in oil futures etc?

Its speculation for speculations sake, which is the art of profiting from market inefficiencies whilst value adding absolutely nothing, and when you're a big enough entity to move and manipulate markets to your advantage its truly parasitic!

The purpose of a bank is to be a conduit between those requiring loans, and those with capital to lend.

Investment banks creating money and then distorting markets with it to their own ends is predatory, parasitic and serves nobodies interests but their own.

/rant
Bow Sir - could not agree more.

Short term buying and selling within financial markets for the sake of pure profiteering adds virtually NO VALUE whatsever and is simply taking the cream off people who actually work to produce a service or product.

If the devil exists, reckon I'd know where to find him
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 28-10-2009, 12:37 AM
Bobbyoutback's Avatar
Bobbyoutback
Registered User

Bobbyoutback is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Broken Hill
Posts: 376
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nesti View Post
They will short sell and naked short sell their own dollar into oblivion when the time comes.
Hi Nesti,

Naked shorting is now banned in Australia , at last !
But after all the poison games in the past that send so many to the wall , why was this crap play possible ?

Cheers Bobby.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 28-10-2009, 12:45 AM
Nesti (Mark)
Registered User

Nesti is offline
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 799
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobbyoutback View Post
Hi Nesti,

Naked shorting is now banned in Australia , at last !
But after all the poison games in the past that send so many to the wall , why was this crap play possible ?

Cheers Bobby.

Because we're not China. Any national shorting China would go to the firing squad...rightly so too.

The West wrongly admires those who play survival of the fittest monetarily. The weak or ignorant are cannon fodder.

I wanna see Wall Street become down-town Mogadishu.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +10. The time is now 03:44 AM.

Powered by vBulletin Version 3.8.7 | Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertisement
Bintel
Advertisement