As I write this entry this morning, the yield on Irish 10-year bonds is showing as 6.66% and indeed the devil may be lurking in the detailed workings which support the estimates published this morning. At this point there are a few concerns:
1. Anglo’s remaining €19bn of NAMA loans (at face value) are to be transferred to NAMA by the end of October 2010. We are still waiting for a NAMA reaction to this morning’s announcement by the Minister for Finance, Brian Lenihan and joint statement from the Central Bank Governor Patrick Honohan and Financial Regulator Matthew Elderfield but it seems that the third tranche has been abandoned – that’s the one that was expected to transfer by “the end of September 2010”. Including Tranche 3, Anglo was going to transfer €20.6bn of loans (€9.25bn T1, €6.75bn T2 and €3.6bn in T3) so the implication is that NAMA can undertake due diligence and value some €15bn of Anglo loans in the next 30 days – and Anglo is the bank with poorer loan and security documentation. Frankly it doesn’t appear realistic. But will any subsequent revision to the values materially affect the position? Difficult to say though the EU may reject the valuations outright as not being to the standard approved in the application for EU approval and the relevant EU Decision.
2. Whilst Patrick Honohan has attempted to spread the responsibility for today’s estimates far and wide – “relying on advice from NAMA”, the NTMA, Anglo management, “third party analysis”, ultimately this is a Patrick Honohan production. And to a large extent he has an impossible task in predicting future losses. As anticipated in an entry on here last weekend he has adopted the approach taken by the EU in stress testing its main banks over the summer by adopting a base case and adverse scenario. The application of these two scenarios to the NAMA loans is reasonably straightforward – the remaining €19bn of NAMA-bound loans at Anglo are expected to suffer a 67% haircut and in the adverse scenario a 70% haircut, though the difference of 3% is NAMA’s estimate of the margin of error in the 67%. However the non-NAMA loan loss estimates are to a large extent shrouded in mystery – coming from a mysterious and unidentified independent third party (I’m guessing it wasn’t Peter Mathews!), Anglo management (they’re the people who produced a laughable restructuring plan for the EU in November 2009 and who also predicted total Anglo losses at €10-13bn in March 2010) and the “CEBS base case loss rates”. Will anyone accept these sources as sufficiently credible to accept today’s announcements as final?
3. Whilst today’s announcements cursorily dealt with Anglo’s loans, what about assumptions on derivative losses, bondholders burnings, NAMA bond discounts, NAMA subordinated debt discounts and other potential areas of profit or loss.
4. With respect to INBS, omitted from any of the announcements is the estimated haircut or discount on future NAMA bound loans and there is little detail to support the €5.4bn that is going into INBS (€2.7bn in May and €2.7bn imminently). However €5.4bn is within the ranges previously openly discussed by commentators as the probable level of capital needed by INBS.
5. Allied Irish Banks PLC (AIB) was famously required to come up with €7.4bn of capital by the end of 2010 and in order to achieve that target, AIB was to sell its Polish operation (Bank Zachodni), its US operation with regional lender M&T Bank Corporation and its UK operations. The Polish sale has been achieved subject to shareholder approval but there seems to be delay with the remaining two disposals, particularly the UK operation which as recently as August was predicted to be sold in September 2010. Any shortfall in the €7.4bn capital was to prompt either a public issue by AIB or a further State injection. We learn today that the Central Bank estimate that AIB needs a further €3bn of capital (€10.4bn in total but that will reduce by €2.5bn if the Polish transaction is approved). So the State could be on the line for up to €7.9bn of additional capital if the US and UK sales are delayed or fail and AIB does not seek a public issue. An additional issue with AIB is whilst the haircut now being adopted by the Central Bank for future AIB tranches (60%) is high compared to the weighted average on Tranches 1 and 2 (48.5%). However there is no suggestion that non-NAMA loans have been subjected to any realistic assessment of likely losses and remember that AIB has an estimated €48bn of non-NAMA commercial lending of which about a third relates to property. So could AIB’s losses be far from final?
6. Bank of Ireland: A couple of days ago on here we looked at the Bank of Ireland loans to McDaid Developments (Ireland) Limited – GBP £42m of loans that are reported to be exposed to 85% losses. Although Bank of Ireland has been top of the class in Tranches 1 and 2 with the lowest haircuts (36.2% weighted average) and the statements this morning apparently confirmed that BoI was alright for capital even with a 42% discount, is 42% enough? Also, like the other banks, BoI seems to have been less than realistic in reporting its non-NAMA losses. So is capital requirement of BoI at the already invested €3.5bn final?
7. The Educational Building Society (EBS): This is a tiddly building society and its loan book is dominated by relatively good performing residential mortgages. Its weighted average haircut in Tranches 1 and 2 was 37.9%. Apparently the estimates today used a “final” EBS haircut of 60% and that no further capital is required (beyond the near €900m already announced presumably). Whilst EBS might not be final (and concerns have been recently raised here about its provisions), because it didn’t extensively lend on commercial or development property, its losses will be limited. So although it might be back for further capital, it is likely to be in the €ms.
So the purpose of today’s announcements was to bring finality and certainty to the cost of the financial crisis. In absolute terms, it most certainly doesn’t do that. But is the information published sufficient to address the concerns of lenders to Ireland? The yield on 10-year bonds is 6.6% so the announcements have not immediately had the desired effect. My guess is that the announcements don’t go far enough and there is unlikely to be any significant fall in lending costs and that indeed they may rise once the horror of the estimated final NAMA haircuts sink in.
Read Full Post »