25.11.2014 Views

Jekyll_text

Jekyll_text

Jekyll_text

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

.<br />

80 THE CREATURE FROM JEKYLL ISLAND<br />

"<br />

again in a slightly different form. Capital, especially for small<br />

companies, was now corning from bonds which Drexel had found a<br />

way to mass market. In fact, Drexel was even able to use those<br />

bonds to engineer corporate takeovers, an activity that previously<br />

had been reserved for the mega-investment houses. By 1986, Drexel<br />

had become the most profitable investment bank in the country.<br />

Here was $180 billion that no longer was being channeled<br />

through Wall Street. Here was $180 billion that was coming from<br />

people's savings instead of being created out of nothing by the<br />

banks. In other words, here was growth built upon real investment,<br />

not inflation. Certain people were not happy about it.<br />

Glenn Yago, Director of the Economic Research Bureau and<br />

Associate Professor of Management at the State University of New<br />

York at Stony Brook, explains the problem:<br />

It was not until high yield securities were applied to restructuring<br />

through deconglomeration and takeovers that hostilities against the<br />

junk bond market broke out.... The high yield market grew at the<br />

expense of bank debt, and high yield companies grew at the expense<br />

of the hegemony of many established firms. As Peter Passell noted in<br />

The New York Times, the impact was first felt on Wall Street, "where<br />

sharp elbows and a working knowledge of computer spreadsheets<br />

suddenly counted more than a nose for dry sherry or membership in<br />

Skull and Bones." 1<br />

The first line of attack on this new market of high-yield bonds<br />

was to call them "junk." The word itself was powerful. The<br />

financial media picked it up and many investors were frightened<br />

away.<br />

The next step was for compliant politicians to pass a law<br />

requiring S&Ls to get rid of their "junk/' supposedly to protect the<br />

public. That this was a hoax is evident by the fact that only 5% ever<br />

held any of these bonds, and their holdings represented only 1.2%<br />

of the total S&Ls assets. Furthermore, the bonds were performing<br />

satisfactorily and were a source of much needed revenue. Nevertheless,<br />

The Financial Institutions Reform and Recovery Act, which<br />

was discussed previously, was passed in 1989. It forced S&Ls to<br />

liquidate at once their "junk" bond holdings. That caused their<br />

HOME, SWEET LOAN 81<br />

rices to plummet, and the thrifts were even further weakened as<br />

jL>y took a loss on the sale. Jane Ingraham comments:<br />

Overnight, profitable S&Ls were turned into government-owned<br />

basket cases in the hands of the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC).<br />

t add to the disaster, the RTC itself, which became the country's<br />

largest owner of junk bonds ... flooded the market again with $1.6<br />

billion of its holdings at the market's bottom in 1990.. .<br />

So it was government itself that crashed the junk bond market, not<br />

Michael Milken, although the jailed Milken and other former officials<br />

of Drexel Burnham Lambert have just agreed to a $1.3 billion<br />

settlement of the hundreds of lawsuits brought against them by<br />

government regulators, aggrieved investors, and others demanding<br />

"justice." 1<br />

Incidentally,<br />

these bonds have since recovered and, had the<br />

S&Ls been allowed to keep them, they would be in better financial<br />

condition today. And so would be the RTC.<br />

With the California upstarts out of the way, it was a simple<br />

matter to buy up the detested bonds at bargain prices and to bring<br />

control of the new market back to Wall Street. The New York firm<br />

of Salomon Brothers, for example, one of Drexel's most severe<br />

critics during the 1980s, is now a leading trader in the market<br />

Drexel created.<br />

REAL PROBLEM IS GOVERNMENT REGULATION<br />

So the real problem within the savings-and-loan industry is<br />

government regulation which has insulated it from the free market<br />

and encouraged it to embark upon unsound business practices. As<br />

the Wall Street Journal stated on March 10, 1992:<br />

If<br />

you're going to wreck a business the size of the U.S. Thrift<br />

industry, you need a lot more power than Michael Milken ever had.<br />

You need the power of national political authority, the kind of power<br />

possessed only by regulators and Congress. Whatever "hold" Milken<br />

or junk bonds may have had on the S&Ls, it was nothing compared<br />

with the interventions of Congress.<br />

At the time this book went to press, the number of S&Ls that<br />

operated during the 1980s had dropped to less than half. As<br />

failures, mergers, and conversion into banks continue, the number<br />

w iU decline further. Those that remain fall into two groups: those<br />

1. Glenn Yago, Junk Bonds: How High Yield Securities Restructured Corporate America<br />

(New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), p. 5.<br />

1-<br />

'"Banking on Government/' pp. 24, 25.<br />

-<br />

Quoted in "Banking on Government," p. 26.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!