With the ripples of the fallout in the US financial crisis spreading all over the world, many are questioning how did all this happened. A majority of people are saying that it all boils down to greed. Though it may be true that greed played a major role in this crisis, another which many overlooked is transparency. A decade ago, a young British trader was dealing with complex financial derivatives in Singapore. As a direct result of his trading activities, Baring Bank lost $1.4 billion in the futures market and closed its doors after 233 years of banking traditions. The doors also closed on Nick Leeson when he was sent to prison for four and half years for the fiasco.
That incident begs the question why a twenty eight years old trader was allowed to deal with such complex and exotic financial instrument like derivatives without any supervision. The main reason was that no one knew any better. The bosses in London just knew the books were showing a huge profit. None of them actually knew anything about derivatives except its name. What Nick Leeson serves to highlight is the generational gap between the top management and those at the trading desk. As long as everyone was making money, everything was okay.
Today the same situation is repeating itself on Wall Street with the proliferation of exotic instruments like CDOs and MBS. Besides the financial institutions themselves having difficulties knowing what they have on their assets portfolios, the Federal Reserve Board and US Treasury are also hard pressed to find a mechanism to value these “toxic assets”. The situation has resulted into this mess as there is a total divorce in corporate responsibility from one’s action. This is a classic case of what “ignorance is bliss” all about. It’s a great excuse for greed.
Five years ago, the US economy faced a similar crisis though on a smaller scale as compared to today. The issue at hand then was the Enron scandal. Hailed by Fortune Magazine as the most innovative in the US for six consecutive years (1996 to 2001), it later became an icon to symbolise American corporate excesses. It also represented the largest bankruptcy in US history back in 2001. Enron collapse played a major role in shaking up investors as it was able to hide its losses for five years through creative accounting. Due to lack of disclosure about its corporate activities, the audit committee of Enron was unable to fulfill its responsibility. In addition, the auditors of Enron also had close ties with the management and this gave them little incentives to pursue further questioning to discover the true nature of Enron‘s financial health.
Besides hiding its losses from investors, Enron’s management was also involved in insider trading and was excising their stocks options just before the collapse of the company. The irony was that, they were also encouraging their employees to invest further into Enron’s’ shares with their pension funds. The result was that a majority of the employees lost their life savings. On February 22 2005, the Bush Administration met with senior Federal financial officials to discuss what to do with the situation. The majority of those at the meeting were against the idea of holding corporate chiefs responsible for the activities of their companies. Most were contented to let the market sort its own problems out by doing nothing. The only two dissenting voices that were speaking out against corporate corruption were Alan Greenspan, the ex Federal Reserve Chairman and Paul O’ Neil, then the Treasury Secretary for the Bush Administration.
The result of that meeting was a half measure adopted by Congress as the Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act. The problem was that the Act was more towards holding auditors of the company liable for the accuracy of their client’s balance sheet rather than holding top management responsible. Today, the Bush Administration is asking Congress to approve a “blank cheque” of $700 billion so that the omnipotent Treasury Secretary Mr. Paulson can buy toxic assets from financial institutions with taxpayers’ dollars. Apart from being a direct beneficiary, (Mr. Paulson own an estimated $700 million worth of shares in Goldman Sachs Inc), the plan also call for unquestionable decisions to be made by the Treasury Secretary. There is no provision for any oversight committee to see through the execution of the bailout plan.
We in Australia also face the same complacency as shown by the Australian Securities and Investment Commission (ASIC) with regards to the Fincorp fiasco. When questioned for its lack of regulatory activities, the ASIC claimed that it was not responsible for approving prospectus but rather that task lies with the issuer and the advisors of the issuer. This had brought little comfort to the 8000 retail investors who had lost A$300 million. After Fincorp, came the WestPoint, whom the financial planners touted as a safe investment. The irony was that all the financial planners were licensed by the ASIC.
Successful investors like Warren Buffett and George Soros do not face this sort of situation because they adopt their own approaches towards investing. While everyone was herding towards the credit default swaps market, Warren Buffett warned that these instruments were “financial weapons of mass destructions” as early as five years ago. George Soros made his billions when everyone else was losing money. The main reason George Soros emerged a winner in the currencies market was that he adopted a system of investment called statistical arbitrages during trading. By using mathemical principles, the arbitrages trading system allows an investor to hedge his investment regardless of the market outcome. (To find out more read, Sports-Arbitrage – How To Place Riskless Bets & Create Tax-Free Investments). Initially pioneered by Morgan Stanley Equity Desk Operations during the 1980s, the system today have advanced tremendously to using softwares like the ArbAlarm to allow investors to locate situation for arbitrages within mere seconds throughout the entire world.
The fact of the matter is that despite what the financial experts or government regulatory bodies claims, no investments is totally safe when control goes out of your hand. Before, bricks and mortars were considered “fail safe” investment as you have the physical asset to rely on. But with the subprime lending crisis that is happening around us today, we can see that everything is very much dependent upon external factors beyond our control. Superannuation returns and share prices are dependent on the global financial market. Property prices now are also affected by global economic conditions which are dictated by the very people who had caused the credit crunch crisis in this world.

