摩根大通倫敦鯨陰魂不散
|
????摩根大通(JPMorgan)要擺脫倫敦鯨的打擊，可能會比杰米?戴蒙想象得更困難。 ????上周五，摩根大通發布了創紀錄的第三季度利潤。當時，首席執行官戴蒙表示，有毒的合成交易將該行卷入了風波，但這只是個“小插曲”。他在與記者和分析師召開的多次公司電話會議上，無數次說到這些損失已不是問題，希望我們能停止談論這個話題。 ????戴蒙在某種程度上說得沒錯。總體來看，這一交易損失現為62億美元，可能會再增加10億美元。但第三季度僅計入區區4.49億美元，甚至都不足以影響應該對這些交易損失負責的首席投資辦公室（Chief investment office，簡稱CIO）的利潤，更別提整個公司的利潤了。雖然有倫敦鯨風波和其他影響，該行第三季度的利潤達到了令人吃驚的57億美元。其余損失，如果有損失的話（戴蒙曾暗示稱，剩余頭寸可能盈利），將按時間推移進行分攤。摩根大通已變得大到不能倒。 ????但從長遠來看，倫敦鯨對該行造成的損失可能不止這些。首席投資辦公室的目的是對沖該行放貸業務的風險。但辦公室前負責人伊那?德魯認為，她不僅能對沖銀行風險，還能在這個過程中賺錢。她也確實賺過不少錢。更重要的是，她在該行其他業務不賺錢的時候同樣賺了很多錢。 ????僅2008年和2009年，首席投資辦公室就曾創造了48億美元的利潤。這是一個非常大的數額，是摩根大通零售銀行業務（包括銀行和投資建議）同期利潤的5倍，比規模大很多、而且更為人知的投資銀行業務同期利潤也只少了20億美元。 ????倫敦鯨事件發生后，摩根大通已經顯著縮減首席投資辦公室的業務。該行早就預計下個季度首席投資辦公室將損失3億美元，這意味著該公司為對沖放貸業務風險付出的代價已經超過了放貸業務的利息收入。太安全了。這對于對沖操作是正常的，為3,500億美元的組合付出這樣的代價也不是什么了不得的費用。但就在幾年前，首席投資辦公室還是搖錢樹。 ????一些損失將被組合的增長所抵消。摩根大通稱，首席投資辦公室的組合價值第三季度增長了30億美元。這是由于債券價格上漲。但在市場不景氣的時期，首席投資辦公室組合的上漲并沒有那么明顯和可靠。 ????曾幾何時，對金融危機和杰米?戴蒙的評價是：摩根大通首席執行官早早預見到了次債按揭市場的崩盤，因此引領該行避開雷區，成了一位英雄。但今年看來，這只是一方面。在幕后，戴蒙有一個鮮為人知的部門壓下了巨額的高風險賭注，在艱難時期曾出人意料地獲得了回報。但如今這一切都已經成為往事。 ????譯者：早稻米 |
????Casting off JPMorgan's London Whale may be harder than Jamie Dimon thinks. ????On Friday, when JPMorgan Chase (JPM) reported its third quarter record profits, CEO Dimon said the toxic mix of synthetic trades that have plagued the bank was a "sideshow." In conference calls with reporters and analysts, he said numerous times that the losses weren't an issue any more, and he hoped we could all stop talking about it. ????And in a way Dimon is right. Overall, the trading loss is now at $6.2 billion, and could grow by another $1 billion. But in the quarter it was a mere $449 million. That wasn't even enough to crater the bottom line of the chief investment office, the unit which was until recently responsible for the losing trades, let alone the whole bank. London Whale and all, the bank ended up earning an astounding $5.7 billion from July through September. The rest of the losses, if there are any (Dimon hinted at the fact that the remaining position could make a profit), will drip out overtime. JPMorgan has become Too Big To Lose. ????But in the long-haul the London Whale may have cost the bank more than it appears. The stated point of the chief investment office was to hedge the bank's lending division. But Ina Drew, the former head of the unit that gave birth to the Whale, believed that she could not only hedge the bank, but make money while doing it. And she made a lot. More importantly, she made a lot of money when other parts of the bank weren't. ????In 2008 and 2009 alone, the CIO office had profits of $4.8 billion. That's a huge amount. It's five times as much as the bank's retail unit, which includes banking and investment advice, made in the same time. And it's only $2 billion short of what the much larger, and much better known, investment banking division of JPMorgan made in the same time. ????In the wake of the Whale, JPMorgan has significantly cut back what the CIO does. The bank is already projecting that the unit will lose $300 million in interest in the next quarter, meaning what it is paying for protection is more than what the bank will make back in interest. It's gone ultra safe. That's normal for a hedge, and not a heck of a lot to pay to protect a portfolio that is $350 billion. But just a few years ago, the unit used to be a money printer. ????Some of those losses will be offset by gains in the portfolio. JPMorgan said that the value of the CIO's portfolio rose by $3 billion in the third quarter. That was because bond prices rose. In bad times, though, it's not clear gains in the CIO's portfolio will be there to draw on. ????For a while, the history of the financial crisis and Jamie Dimon stood as this: JPMorgan's CEO spotted the subprime mortgage market blowup early, steered his bank clear of it and emerged a hero. But what has become clear this year is that's only part of the story. Behind the scenes Dimon had a little know unit making huge risky bets that miraculously paid off in times of trouble. And now it's gone. |
