Mai dire Fannie Mae

Oggi è andata così

I giornali si stanno riempendo di articoli su "quali titoli beneficeranno (o soffriranno) da una vittoria di Kerry/Bush.." e come al solito si parla energie alternative che guadagnano con Kerry e petroliferi con Bush oppure farmaceutici e Halliburton che soffrono con Kerry ecc... Molte di queste idee sono vaghe, ma una invece chiara è ^Fannie Mae#^ la mega-mega società di prestiti immobiliari che è misto da una società privata e un ente governativo ed è il principale perno in USA della "Bolla" del credito e degli immobili. Da inizio 1998, le sue attività sono salite da $392 miliardi a $989 miliardi (+153%), cioè ha un bilancio di quasi 1.000 miliardi di dollari, pari al PIL dell'Italia. Tre americani su quattro comprano la casa con i soldi di Fannie Mae e in pratica è una mega banca del credito immobiliare, ed è la maggiore istituzione finanziaria del mondo come bilancio. Fannie Mae è in pratica una creazione dell'amministrazione Clinton, Raynes il suo amministratore delegato è un democratico di ferro nominato da Clinton e chi la attacca sono dei repubblicani Come noto due mesi fa è stata coinvolta in accuse di irregolarità contabili ed è ora sotto inchiesta anche al Congresso in termini di regolamentazioni più pesanti ed è l'unica società quotata di cui Alan Greenspan abbia mai parlato male in pubblico (!) perchè è una semi-agenzia governativa che presta senza avere quasi capitale: fa crediti ora per circa 1,000 miliardi circa senza quasi avere mezzi propri (tutti pensano che il governo garantisca). Se vince Kerry è un Buy qui perchè la salvano, se vince Bush Sell Short perchè la smantellano (leggi i post precedenti per le altre spiegazioni)

Sta crollando Fannie Mae, il mega-iper finanziatore dei 2/3 dei mutui immobiliari in america e come con Enron ^ci sono quelli che dall'interno hanno denunciato pasticci#http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/25/business/25fannie.html?ex=1182484800&en=749af082442855f9&ei=5035&partner=MARKETWATCH^, per ora solo nel calcolo degli ammortamenti FNM capitalizza ora 63 miliardi di dollari (aveva toccato 90 miliardi) e costa ora solo 7-8 volte gli utili, ma nel suo bilancio ci sono circa 1.000 (mille) miliardi di debiti, ma ^FNM#^ è mezzo statale anche se opera come società privata, si assume che lo stato garantisca dei suoi debiti per cui li può fare con una percentuale di capitale minuscola. FNM è una creazione degli anni '90 e da sola ha forse creato più liquidità della federl reserve, è uno dei simboli del boom speculativo e a uno a uno arrivano tutti alla resa dei conti Se guardi il bilancio 2003 ci sono 987 miliardi di debito e 18 miliardi di equity ! (mille miliardi sono il Pil dell'Italia)

Questo bel grafico qui sotto spiega diverse cose, ad esempio perchè le borse americane abbiano recuperato in un anno circa il 60% di quello che avevano perso dal massimo storico della "bolla" di marzo 2000 giù fino al minimo di marzo 2003 La tabella è in miliardi di dollari, ma facciamo finta che siano invece solo dollari: in media una famiglia (americana) ha ora circa 10mila dollari di debito mentre nel 1989 ad esempio ne aveva 2 o 3 mila Allo stesso tempo nel 1989 la somma dei suoi "asset" (azioni, obbligazioni, valore della casa ecc...) era di di circa 20-22 mila $ ora invece è salito a 50-52mila dollari Quindi nel 1989 in media una famiglia aveva : 22mila - 2 mila = 20 mila dollari di ricchezza NETTA Nel 2004 in media una famiglia ha : 52mila - 8 mila = 44 mila dollari di ricchezza NETTA (le cifre vere aggregate sono di 20 e 40 mila miliardi di dollari) QUINDI LA RICCHEZZA NETTA delle famiglie USA è PIU' CHE RADDOPPIATA IN DOLLARI DAL 1989 AL 2004 nonostante il debito sia quadruplicato (!!). Questa è ricchezza NETTA, ma NOMINALE. L'inflazione però non ha fatto raddoppiare il costo della vita da allora (in media era al 3%, per 15 anni) per cui l'aumento della Ricchezza Netta è vero e reale e al netto dell'inflazione è almeno un +30% o +40% A questo punto uno obietta: "... ma il dollaro ora vale ora molto meno che nel 1989...". Mica vero, sulla media dei cambi il dollaro vale da un -5% a un -10% di meno ora di quanto valeva nel 1989. Ad es verso il franco svizzero, la moneta neutra per eccellenza oscillava tra 1.30 e 1.47 franchi circa e oggi vale 1.27 franchi. Sullo Yen nel 1989 valeva 120-130 Yen e ora ne vale 111. Di conseguenza questo aumento della RICCHEZZA al netto dei debiti (che pure sono quadruplicati...) è REALE al netto dell'inflazione e REALE anche in termini di altre monete. Conclusione: solo se il valore del dollaro cedesse di un altro -15% o -20% rispetto alla media delle altre monete il maggiore indebitamento complessivo dell'economia si tradurrebbe in una perdita di ricchezza reale. Finora nonostante tutto il debito è aumentata. E si riversa sui mercati finanziari

Qualche mese fa si discuteva se l'economia Usa potesse o meno entrare in deflazione, e si diceva che dopo aver abbassato i tassi quasi al minimo l'unico modo a disposizione della Fed per combattere il rischio deflazione sarebbe stato iniziare a stampare banconote a manetta. Dall'ultimo prospetto nel sito Fed, pare che stia andando proprio così. M1 = contanti e depositi di c\c, quindi è l'indicatore più adatto per vedere se è variato il tasso di incremento nell'emissione di nuovi biglietti da parte della Fed. Nel prospetto si vede che l'aumento di M1 negli ultimi mesi è stato verticale, in particolare nel solo periodo febbraio-aprile l'aumento è stato dell'8.9%. In passato mediamente l'aumento era sul 4% annuo. Viceversa il tasso d'incremento di M3 mostra segni di flessione,segno che il cavallo beve sempre di meno.

Da ottobre a oggi (e anche nei primi mesi dell'anno mentre le borse cedevano) le obbligazioni a alto rendimento (e alto rischio) hanno avuto un rally continuo. Sempre più soldi entrano nel settore "high yield", detto anche dei "junk bond", i rendimenti continuano a calare, ad es a 6.9% in marzo in media da 7.7% in Febbraio (!!) e stanno calando ormai da un anno, mese per mese, le emissioni ovviamente ora incoraggiate aumentano di colpo. Le banche non prestano tanto, nè in europa (ieri c'erano commenti su un "razionamento" del credito in germania) nè in america, ma tutto il setttore obbligazionario corporate e in particolare quello rischioso sta salendo più di quanto salgano le azioni, attira denaro degli investitori affamati di rendimenti e ancora restii sulle azioni e consente alle aziende in difficoltà in america di finanziarsi. Un super-orso come quello del Credit Bubble Bulletin a PrudentBear.com vede ora una REFLAZIONE seria e dice che a breve deve avere effetto sull'economia --------------------------------------------- Credit Bubble Bulletin - PrudentBear.com ---- 4 - Dow Jones (Tom Barkley): “The flood of money into high-yield bonds continued unabated this week, with junk mutual funds reporting about $1.2 billion in inflows… according to AMG… With investors hungry for yield, nearly $6.7 billion has poured into the market in just the last six weeks, and the pace has accelerated over the past month. Last week, just over $1 billion in new investments entered the market. Meanwhile, the more than $10.5 billion of inflows in the first quarter is only about $1.1 billion short of the total for all of 2002. Those flows have been a big factor in the outperformance of high-yield funds in the quarter, boasting an average return of 5.61%, according to…Lipper Inc.” First-quarter junk bond issuance of $30 billion was up 46% from the year earlier quarter. (Reflation Watch) April 3: “The global speculative-grade corporate bond default rate fell to 6.9% in March, from 7.7% in February, the twelfth monthly decline since the default rate peaked in January 2002, Moody’s Investors Service reported today. Over the first quarter 2003, the Global bond default rate tumbled to 6.9%, from 8.3% at the quarter’s beginning. The drop of 1.4% represents the largest one-month decline since the second quarter 1992.” (Reflation Watch) April 1 – Bloomberg: “Massachusetts collected $1.39 billion in tax revenue in March, 5.6 percent above the state’s lowered forecast, according to Revenue Commissioner Alan LeBovidge. That’s an increase of 7.75 percent from March last year, and was bolstered by $11 million from a tax amnesty program and from additional taxes brought in because of the $1.1 billion tax increase the legislature passed last year.” Bankruptcy filings jumped to 36,260 last week, up 11% y-o-y. Year-to-date bankruptcies are running 8% above the year ago record levels. The temporary spike in mortgage rates was surely responsible for the Mortgage Bankers Association’s weekly refi index dropping 20% to the lowest level in five weeks (up 410% y-o-y). The Purchase application index declined 5% for the week, while remaining 4% above the year ago level. Total first-quarter mortgage refinancings surpassed the previous record established during the fourth-quarter by a notable 31% (from Moody’s John Lonski). Recalling that record fourth-quarter annualized Home Mortgage debt growth of $855 billion was 60% greater than 2001’s annual record of $531 billion, it appears certain that first-quarter mortgage lending will be another one for the history books. While it understandably received little attention, March auto sales bounced back notably from a weak February. Strong late month purchases put the month’s seasonally adjusted sales at a respectable 16.2 million units, up from February’s 15.4 million. To put this sales level into perspective, seasonally adjusted sales did not surpass 16 million units between August 1989 and February 1997 (according to Bloomberg data). For March, GM sales were down 3.3% y-o-y, Ford down 4.8% y-o-y, and Chrysler down 3.4% y-o-y. Yet many foreign nameplates enjoy booming sales (indicative of a highly imbalanced Bubble economy). “American Honda posted a new record for total vehicles and light truck sales in March…up 20.7%, and light truck sales reaching an all-time record of 47,049, up 41.8%.” “Toyota Motor Sales USA…reported best-ever March sales of 165,081, and increase of 9.2% from last year’s record March…the Lexus Division enjoyed a strong March…” “March Sales for the BMW Group were up 14 percent…” “Mercedes-Benz USA reported the best first-quarter in company history…” “Infinity, the luxury division of (Nissan), saw the best month ever in its 13-year history…” “Kia set a first quarter sale record…” Hyundai saw March sales jump 20.3% y-o-y. Volvo sales were up 30% y-o-y, and Porsche 25.9%. “Thanks to three consecutively strong sales months, Saab Cars USA reported sales of 10,885 in the first quarter – the company’s best first-quarter sales in its 47-year history (up 19% to comparable y-o-y).” And for April, the Big Three announced aggressive incentives. GM’s new “Zero to Sixty” incentive plan is called the “most sweeping offer in its history.” The ISM Manufacturing index was reported at a weaker-than-expected 46.2. However, the Prices Paid component jumped 4.5 points (12.5 points in two months) to 70, the highest since April 2000. In fact, Prices Paid has only been higher during four months (January through April of 2000) since early 1995. The Chicago Purchasing Managers index was reported down 6.5 points to 48.4, the lowest reading since October. New Orders dropped 6.5 points to 52.5, while Prices Paid jumped 7.9 points to 62.8. Yesterday’s ISM Non-manufacturing index was similarly bleak, with the composite index sinking six points to 47.9. New Orders declined 5.3 points, as New Export Orders sank 10 points to 48.5. Non-Manufacturing Prices Paid added 1.1 to 62, the highest reading since October 2000. February New Factory Orders declined 1.5%, with Total New Orders up 1.9% y-o-y. Year-over-year, Non-defense Capital Goods Orders were down 2.4%, while Defense Capital Goods orders were up 8.4%. Consumer Goods orders were up 5.2%. February construction spending was down a better-than-expected 0.2%. Total Construction Spending was about unchanged year-over-year, hampered by a 13.3% y-o-y decline in Private Non-residential building (down 26% since Feb. 2001). Yet the residential building boom runs unabated, with spending up 9.9% y-o-y to a record pace. Single-family Construction Spending was up 12% y-o-y, 17.8% over two years, and 69% over six years (pre-Bubble Feb. 1997). Multi-family construction was up 8.7% y-o-y, 21% over two years, and 57% over six years. The Public Sector construction boom continues to slow, with y-o-y spending down 5.2%. Spending, however, remains up 32% from six years ago. Public Housing construction was up 24% y-o-y, and Military was up 30%, while Industrial was down 21% and Roads down 9%. The data are certainly indicative of a severely imbalanced economy. April 4 – American Banker (W.A. Lee): “Despite assurances from card companies that they can keep losses under control during an unsteady credit cycle, analysts are clearly worried about portfolio deterioration, which they call the inevitable product of a souring economy… ‘Consumer credit quality is one of the biggest questions right now. How much leverage can the consumer take on, and how can credit card balances still be growing when consumers are taking all this equity out of their houses?’” April 2 – Rocky Mountain News: “Home foreclosures in the Denver area rose by 38% percent in the first quarter compared with the first three months of 2002.” Yet, “last year foreclosures accounted for about 1.1% of all the homes on the market, while in 1988 they accounted for about 3.8%.” (Data to keep things in proper perspective.) March payroll data was not encouraging, but no disaster either. Total Private Nonfarm Payrolls declined 68,000, down from February’s 370,000. Manufacturing lost another 36,000 jobs, while Service Producing Jobs dropped 94,000 (Eating and Drinking establishment employment down 38,000). Construction jobs added 21,000, the strongest gain since August. Finance and Insurance added 12,000 (3,000 additional Mortgage Bankers and 4,000 more Real Estate agents!), the most since September. Health Services added 22,000 jobs and Social Services gained 11,000. March Private Average Weekly Earnings were up 0.7%, with year-on-year gains of 3.4%. Manufacturing Weekly Earnings were up 2.1% y-o-y, with Service Producing enjoying a 4.9% gain (Finance, Insurance up 8.1%!). Broad money supply (M3) declined $27.5 billion (following last week’s $46.8 billion jump). Currency increased $1.9 billion and Demand Deposits increased $3.7 billion. Savings Deposits dropped $16.9 billion, with Small Denominated Deposits and Retail Money Fund deposits each declining $1.1 billion. Institutional Money Fund deposits declined $6.8 billion and Large Denominated Deposits dropped $8.8 billion Repurchase Agreements added $1.9 billion. Elsewhere, Bank Assets declined $7.7 billion. Securities holdings added $2.2 billion, while Loans and Leases declined $2.0 billion. Security loans jumped $8.4 billion ($25.8 billion in five weeks), while Real Estate Loans dipped $7.5 billion. Commercial and Industrial loans contracted $1.8 billion. March 31 –Reuters: “U.S. asset-backed issuance in the first quarter of 2003 surged to $127.2 billion, up over 20 percent from the previous year, as issuers have leapt to take advantage of low rates, according to data released on Monday by Thomson Financial.” March 31 –Reuters: “U.S. mortgage lenders and Wall Street packaged $232.5 billion of U.S. mortgage-backed securities in the first quarter of 2003 … Thomson Financial said… Issuance of U.S. mortgage-backed bonds in the first three months was higher than the $178.3 billion…(up 30% from Q1 2002!)” March 28 - Dow Jones (Stan Rosenberg): “Aided by a rush of tobacco financings, municipal bond volume spurted 20.6% from year-earlier levels to a new peak of $81.7 billion in the first quarter, Thomson Financial said Friday.” March 31 Bloomberg: “Moody’s Investors Service cut credit ratings by three levels on $19 billion of municipal bonds backed by a 1998 tobacco settlement after Philip Morris USA warned it may not make its next payment to U.S. states. Moody’s took the action after cutting its rating on the senior unsecured rating of Altria Group Inc., parent of Philip Morris, to Baa1 from A2. Philip Morris must post a $12 billion appeal bond after losing a lawsuit in Illinois accusing the company of deceiving smokers by advertising light cigarettes as safer alternatives to full-flavor cigarettes.” March 31, 2003 – Business Wire: “Student loan securitization set a record in 2002, driven by increased issuance from established issuers (primarily Sallie Mae) and new entrants to the market, according to…Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services. Moreover, the student loan market is expected to continue its pattern of strong growth in 2003, bolstered by long-term demographic trends and a broadened investor base for these securities. During 2002, Standard & Poor’s rated $27.2 billion of student loan ABS (both public and private), up sharply from $11.4 billion in the prior year, the report notes.” (Reflation Watch) April 2 – American Banker (Michael Williams, president of Fannie Mae’s eBusiness division): “Last year, close to 10 million homeowners refinanced their mortgages. They cashed out almost $200 billion of their accumulated home equity, far exceeding any previous record. Low mortgage rates and rising home values made cash-out refinancing attractive. But it took a revolution in financial services to make it possible on that record scale… …originations in 2002 topped $2.6 trillion – more than two and a half times the 1993 level. Because of advances in technology and in the free flow of capital, lenders were able to handle these huge volumes with less paperwork, less uncertainly, and lower costs. Streamlining has made it possible for borrowers to close on a refinancing in a as little as five days. The cash-out wave has not left Americans highly leveraged… By 2002, over 90% of lenders used automated underwriting systems and more than 75% of applications were approved in two to three minutes.” The Federal Home Loan Bank System (FHLB) finally reported 2002 results. For the year, total assets increased 10%, while Net Income dropped 16%. Over two years, total assets were up 17% to $764 billion. Meanwhile, 2002 Net Income was down 19% from 2000 to about $1.8 billion. Net Income of only $1.8 billion on assets of $764 billion? What kind of “business” are they running and at what risk? And it is worth mentioning that FHLB’s Derivative Liability jumped from $7.2 billion to $16.3 billion in twelve months, while Derivative Assets increased $664 million to $2.8 billion. Mortgage Loans Held for Portfolio jumped from $27.7 billion to $60.6 billion. This week’s Bulletin will have no ranting, no raving, no geopolitics nor any theoretical musings. There is no need to rehash old “debates” – and there’s not even a thought of resting on our analytical laurels. It’s my sense that we are quickly approaching an analytical “crunch time.” And as my high school basketball coach Paul Halupa was fond of shouting, “Keep your head up and stay on your toes.” (He also seemed to enjoy saying, “It will quit hurting when the pain goes away.”) He taught defense first, then offense. Above all, he believed in discipline, focus, and attention to detail. The current environment beckons for fierce determination and commitment to sound analysis.. Paul McCulley, Pimco’s energetic managing director, commented on CNBC today that the corporate sector remains risk-averse in its hiring and investing practices. Well, this certainly seems to be the case, but this does highlight a most extraordinary disconnect: While the economic sphere (at least the corporate sector) remains wary of risk, the financial sphere demonstrates an incredible expanding risk appetite. The corporate bond market is hot, and the junk bond market is on fire. Emerging bond markets have recovered spectacularly and Yahoo has access to “free money.” We’re in the midst of record mortgage Credit creation and record asset-backed issuance. With the exception of banks’ aversion to commercial lending, the Credit system is firing on all cylinders. It hasn’t been this way in awhile. Then why is the economy (economic sphere) stuck in the mud? How can the U.S. economy appear so poised for recession? Have we finally reached the end of the line, or are there extenuating circumstances? The simple answer is that all is well-explained by the enormous debt overhang weighing down the corporate and household sectors. Yet the analysis is likely not this clean and easy. Today, the Credit spigot is wide open. As risk aversion ebbs dramatically, Credit Availability could not be easier for most households, many businesses, and all financial speculators. But we must remind ourselves that this was not the case just a few months ago. We may ask, is the economy’s recent poor performance then somewhat of a lagging indicator, with previous tightened Credit conditions - coupled with geopolitical considerations – hurting confidence and pressuring the economy? If so, is the maladjusted (Dynamically Hedged) economy poised for a spurt of activity with the positive resolution of today’s acute geopolitical concerns? Tough questions…and we really have no alternative but to wait and search for answers. I was ensnared in The Bear Trap of Group Think back in 1991. I will err on the side of “staying on my toes” and thinking “defensively” until we have clearer indications of the correct answers to the above questions. I do appreciate that some readers are drawn to particular writers because their work provides confirmation of predisposed views. But we don’t want to play that game today – It’s “Crunch Time.” We must commit ourselves to diligent observation and objective analysis. We question everything and take nothing for granted. There is today a very unusual anomaly – an energized financial sphere face to face with a despondent economic sphere. This circumstance is unstable and likely short-lived. It will be resolved either with the economic sphere belatedly engaged by the over-liquefied financial sphere, or with the financial markets at some point buckling under their own weight of gross liquidity and speculative excess. Either the stock and Credit markets are discounting a pickup in economic activity, or perhaps this is one heck of a short-squeeze (stocks, bonds, credit default swaps, etc.) that will leave the marketplace poised for considerable disappointment. It is today difficult for me to contemplate that the economy will not respond somewhat to the animated financial markets. It always has in the past. Nevertheless, the critical analysis is to recognize that we have reached the point where it requires extreme monetary and fiscal stimulus to render even a tepid economic response. There’s no good news here, only postponing an inevitable day of reckoning. And while I can envision the scenario where a faltering consumer sector leads the economy into recession, I can as easily imagine the abundant financial fuel sparking the economy. The latter would be the most problematic scenario, with the Fed trapped in Easy Money Forever and the Credit market hostage to Eternal Speculating, Leveraging and Hedging Excess. The wildly distorted economy will not react to extreme financial stimulation in an even and sustainable manner, but rather quite to the contrary. The bottom line is that the Credit system remains extraordinarily over-liquefied, with investors and the momentous speculating community chasing performance and desperate for yield. The Mortgage Finance Bubble inflationary “blow-off” endures. Moreover, an inflationary bias is sustained throughout some key sectors of the economy (defense, government, healthcare, home construction, and financial services). Still, there’s this nagging and critical issue of the faltering consumer. Will today’s extreme financial excesses temporarily postpone the piercing of the consumer borrowing and spending Bubble? This is where the analysis gets especially challenging – and where we must “keep our heads up and stay on our toes.” A hardy consumer sector demands a continuation of housing inflation and likely requires a boost of confidence that only rising stock prices can provide. A lot has to go right, but the financial markets do appear accommodative to the Fed's inflationary endeavors. We are keenly on Reflation Watch.

FANNIE & FREDDIE ARE SITTING ON $3.1T TIME BOMB By JOHN CRUDELE March 13, 2003 -- HERE'S a question for you philosophy majors to ponder: If someone helps cause a problem, can he absolve himself of guilt by issuing stern warnings about the problem he helped create? Alan Greenspan tried to do it when he mouthed the words "irrational exuberance" to belatedly warn investors about the stock market bubble. But the Fed chairman didn't do anything - like raise borrowing requirements on stock purchases - to stop the excesses. This week one of Greenspan's colleagues at the Fed went after Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, government-sponsored but publicly traded companies that now own or guarantee $3.1 trillion, or 45 percent, of residential debt outstanding in the United States. That's an enormous - and frightening - jump from just 25 percent in 1990. In a speech on Monday, William Poole, head of the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank, raised the potential of a crisis at Fannie Mae and its cousin organization Freddie Mac. He recommended that both be forced to increase their capital to protect against any economic shock, and he wants the federal government to be less on the hook for either of these company's problems. Greenspan himself tried to talk down Fannie and Freddie in 2000. He said the two companies have "important consequences for the structure and efficiency of financial markets." In other words, if Fannie and Freddie cough, the vulnerable financial markets could have a seizure and kill the whole economy. But this week Poole said even more stuff that hasn't been reported, which some people - myself included - think borders on the irresponsible. It had to do with what Poole called the "nonquantifiable risks" of organizations like Fannie and Freddie. "It helps to make this issue concrete by listing some examples," said Poole. "The failure or near-failure of Penn-Central, Continental-Illinois, Long-Term Capital, Enron and WorldCom may not have been complete surprises to knowledgeable insiders, but the shocks were certainly 'news' to market participants, regulators and the general public." Is the Fed suggesting that Fannie and Freddie could soon be in the same league as these corporate basket cases? And, if so, why did our Central Bank allow these mortgage cowboys to get into this position if Washington knew the risks in 2000? Issuing irresponsible warnings now doesn't make the Fed and the rest of Washington any less culpable if Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's derivative business collapses like Enron's did - because as mom always says, actions speak louder than words. Just for the record, I took my first of several swipes at Fannie Mae in a March 3, 2000, column. If the economy broke down, I asked, how much would delinquent mortgages cost taxpayers? Nobody cared then. And with Fannie and Freddie still highly profitable, few people care now. But taxpayers should care for both practical and philosophical reasons.

dematerializzazione ------------------- E' qui la chiave di tutto, altro che stampare carta, la FEd e il resto stampano carta dematerializzata, ossia numerini su un computer. Ragazzi la cosa è assurda, mettiamo con i BOT: a livelli civilistico io sono titolare di un diritto di credito verso lo Stato, diritto rappresentato da un titolo di credito. No titolo, no credito. ora il titolo me l'hanno dematerializzato, io, in fondo in fondo, scoppia la guerra, saltano tutti i backup delle banche, come faccio a dimostrare che avevo questo credito? Possibile non ci sia verso averlo??? Mi sembra poco corretto dal punto di vista legale....

1998 o 1999 non ricordo bene c'e' stata la decartolarizzazione dei titoli di stato, con la quale lo stato ha chiesto che chi avesse titoli di stato rappresentati da certificati cartolari portasse tali titoli in banca per la dematerializzazione. Quindi non ritengo sia possibile detenere titoli e cedole a casa anymore, credo sia necessario un deposito titoli al cui appoggiarli. Una volta il depositario era unicamente Banca Italia adesso credo sia tutto accentrato a Monte Titoli

Prima era possibile avere i BTP in fisico a casa, sotto il materasso e poi andavi con la tua cedolina e ti davano gli sghei. Quindi salvo che non fallisse lo stato eri a posto. Ora non lo so se è possibile detenere attività finanziarie emesse dello stato senza intermediari. Non esiste + il fai da te? Bisognerebbe sentire Min. Tesoro o Montetitoli o MTS o MOT. Una prima soluzione, banale, sarebbe cambiare la banca depositante, scegliendo quella "+ sana" tra le disponibili in Italia. Quindi se hai il deposito su Capitalia o Unicredit o Sanpaolo, via verso Banca Sella (?) o le nuove banche che non fanno crediti perchè o solo c/c online o assicurative....

Il deposito è invece l'obbligazione mediante la quale un soggetto (il depositario) assume l'obbligo di restituire il tantundem e AD NUTUM al depositario. ______________________________________ Il depositario ha lo stesso obbligo nel caso di deposito in conto corrente. Se oggi vado in banca e chiedo la restituzione dei soldi depositati sul mio conto corrente, tutti e subito, la banca me li deve restituire tutti e subito. Non c'è differenza nel caso di soldi depositati su un libretto di risparmio, tranne che per il fatto che devo portarmi appresso il libretto, oltre ai miei documenti. Anche sul libretto di risparmio vengono registrate poste in dare ed in avere. Ed i soldi depositati sul conto corrente sono investiti allo stesso modo di quelli depositati sul libretto di risparmio: al tasso d'interesse attivo che riesci a spuntare. Il fido in c/c poi è solo un rapporto accessorio del deposito in conto corrente, non un elemento qualificante dello stesso. Comunque, al di là di eventuali differenze civilistiche, che possono pure esserci, la mia curiosità verte sul se tali differenze siano rilevanti ai fini dell'interpretazione della legge in materia di garanzia dei depositanti. Secondo te, quella garanzia non si applicherebbe alla tipologia che copre il 95% dei soldi depositati presso le banche. Mentre secondo me, una tale interpretazione sarebbe del tutto priva di senso. I rapporti esclusi sono elencati dalla legge, e tale elencazione va interpretata a mio parere in senso tassativo.

Secondo me i titoli contenuti nel deposito titoli sono custoditi per conto del cliente, e potrebbero andare in fumo solo in caso di malversazione dell'istituto di credito, cioè se l'istituto prima di fallire "si gioca" anche i titoli in deposito come se fossero suoi. Ma se i titoli sono mantenuti ben distinti, l'unico vero rischio è sui denari depositati, per la parte non coperta dal fondo di garanzia. Altrimenti sarebbe come se io posteggio la macchina in un posteggio a pagamento, e il titolare fallisce, mica mi sequestrano la macchina... o no?

scusa luigi ma se io ho un BTp, ho un contratto con lo stato non con la banca questa fa solo da depositario o da intermediario che dir si voglia lo stesso vale per un'azione perchè dici che non sono tutelato? cosa potrebbero fare con i miei BTP?

Ma Luke andrebbe differenziato anche la tipologia di deposito nella forma di Libretto di deposito a risparmio, e certificato di deposito. Nel primo caso la somma e' rimborsabile a vista (tranne nei casi di libretto vincolato peraltro rari), nel secondo caso il certificato di deposito a sempre una scadenza alla quale ti restituiscono il grano.

per me non sei garantito su nulla