Objective Summary
This book compiles news articles about four instances of financial panic: the Black Monday crash of October 19, 1987; the Mexico, Russia, and Asia panics of the 1990’s; the internet bubble and bust in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s; and the real estate bubble and bust in the mid-2000’s. Lewis writes a few pages of introduction, but the bulk of the book comes from excerpts from other authors. The articles demonstrate the difficulties in identifying a bubble in real time and the causes of a burst even in hindsight.
As a compilation of articles, the book lacks a unifying theme or argument. The best lesson—perhaps the only lesson—may be that no one knows why the market acts as it does or where it will go. A combination of fear, greed, ignorance, and corruption influences people’s thoughts, and therefore guides the market’s actions. Add in complicated regulations, financial instruments, and mathematical formulas and you have a recipe for opacity. Some investors, through skill or luck or corruption, profit from the opacity and their wagers. Additional points on each of the four crashes follow.
October 19, 1987 crash:
• No one knows why the crash occurred when it did. The Brady Commission, a presidential commission set up to investigate the crash concluded there were many reasons, one of which was portfolio insurance.
• Portfolio insurance was an idea based on the Black-Scholes options pricing model that suggested an investor could hedge against losses by rapidly short selling index futures through program trading. When many investors tried to do this simultaneously, however, there were not enough buyers to meet the demand of the sellers and stabilize prices, so prices continued to fall.
• The reason for the precise timing of the crash is indiscernible, but the average P/E ratio of stocks was 20 while interest rates on bonds were around 10%. Thus, it took $20 of stock to earn $1 of earnings at the same time it took $10 of bonds to earn $1 of interest. This revealed that stock prices were overvalued and a correction was due. For why would an investor buy stock as a residual claimant when he could have a better return and higher priority claim to company assets as a bondholder?
Mexican, Russian, and Asian crashes of the 1990’s:
• Developing countries had high debt to GDP ratios.
• The International Monetary Fund encouraged developing countries to open their financial markets to international investment and to pay high short-term interest rates while their currencies were fixed to the US dollar. Investment poured in to gain the high interest rates, and a combination of crony capitalism (i.e., payments to politically well-connected individuals and businesses) and subsequent devaluing of currencies pulled money out just as rapidly.
• Russia assigned ownership of its vast natural resources to a politically created oligarchy after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Russia devalued its currency and defaulted on its debt.
• Long-term Capital Management, a large US hedge fund invested in interest rate swap arbitrages, collapsed.
New New Panic, or the internet bubble of the late 1990’s and early 2000’s:
• Internet stock mania began with the IPO of Netscape in April 1995.
• Investors did not fully understand the ramifications of the internet on global commerce, but many people were blindly bullish and jettisoned traditional measures of company value such as P/E ratios and even profitability. One example involves Books-a-Million’s stock tripling shortly after it announced merely that it was revamping its website. This book retailer trailed behind Barnes & Noble, Borders, and Amazon in sales, and online sales were only a small part of its business, but investors bought into the bubble and belief that any action involving the internet was a sure thing.
• Marketing hype and jargon allowed companies to raise vast sums of money to try to build or bluff their way to legitimate businesses. Most failed. Smalltime internet companies like computer.com, ourbeginning.com, and pets.com spent large portions—sometimes half—of their working capital on single advertisements during the 2000 Super Bowl with nothing to show for it.
• The internet revolutionized commerce. Amazon is a resounding success, and its lower overhead allowed it to compete with Borders, Books-a-Million, and Barnes & Noble. But businesses still eventually require profitability, and they take time to improve their business models. One particularly bad business model was AllAdvantage, which paid customers by the hour to surf the internet. The idea was that the company could collect user data and sell it to advertisers, but the company burned through its startup capital too quickly and never developed a means to monetize the data it collected.
• Jack Willoughby’s March 20, 2000 article “Burning Up,” in Barron’s gave a potent prick to the internet bubble. It laid out the 200 or so internet companies that were burning through cash the fastest and noted that many of them would be out of cash within months. Such companies had to raise new capital simply to survive. The longer the companies continued without profitability, the more expensive it was for them to raise cash, and many could not raise additional cash at all. Insiders began dumping stock, which is never a good sign.
The People’s Panic, or the real estate bubble in the mid-2000’s:
• The real estate bubble burst sometime around 2007. Once again, the exact causes are unknown, but there are many theories and contributors.
• Interest rates were kept low by the Federal Reserve, permitting excess investment. Government policies from Clinton and Bush encouraged homeownership. Government sponsored entities like Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac bought loans, alleviating underwriters from the risks of keeping the increasingly unsound loans. Builders and realtors loved the action because of the revenue and commissions they received. Builders paid inspectors to value properties above market rates, and inspectors complied. Investment banks created and sold new financial instruments, such as mortgage-backed securities and collateralized debt obligations, to investors as products with higher returns and lower risks because they were backed by mortgage payments, which were historically sound investments. Ratings agencies like Standard and Poor’s and Moody continued to rubber stamp risky investments as triple-A rated under faulty assumptions about the strength of the housing market and because the Wall Street banks that brought them the instruments for ratings paid them to do so. As the real estate markets in places like New York, Florida, and California heated up, speculators came in with the hope of buying a house, holding it for a limited amount of time, and cashing out on the resale.
• Wall Street firms heavily invested in subprime mortgages lost money. Bear Stearns and Lehman Brothers went bankrupt. Jim Cramer from CNBC’s show “Mad Money” looked foolish claiming that Bear Stearns was a buy at $62/share when it ended up selling to JP Morgan Chase for $10/share. Some people, like John Paulson, a hedge fund manager who bet against the housing market through newly invented instruments like credit default swaps, made lots of money. Paulson in particular made $3 or $4 billion.
Subjective Thoughts
Lewis is a fantastic writer, but this book sucks because Lewis didn’t write it. No one person wrote it, so it lacks coherence. It’s like a subreddit on financial panics without the witty commentary. It was frustrating not to have a unifying position or lens through which to filter the deluge of information, and I took away only a handful of tidbits. First, no one knows anything for sure when it comes to financial panics. People who got it right once may not be right again. Second, people who provide cocksure assessments of where the market is going should be embarrassed when their predictions prove woefully incorrect—I’m looking at you, Jim Cramer and David Pidwell (the venture capitalist who first funded AllAdvantage). Third, government involvement reliably leads to complexity, debt, and bubbles. Without government manipulation of economics, there would be fewer and less painful distortions. The use of force and the size of government interventions must, by their very nature, lead to distortions away from the preferences of the market. The government has no business pushing homeownership on people who would not otherwise choose it, or childbirth, or education, or green energy, or any of the myriad other choices people make to pursue happiness. Even goals that sound good come with unforeseen consequences and costs that others were unwilling to pay in the absence of force. Stay out of the way. Keep the rules simple and transparent. And, for the love of everything holy, do not bail out anyone for their bad decisions.
Regarding the specifics of this book, I had more familiarity with the internet and real estate bubbles, so those sections were easier to follow. The selection of articles regarding foreign financial crises was much harder for me to understand, and I know little more now than I did at the beginning of the book. Paul Krugman’s and Chris Dodd’s contributions were worthless, in my eyes, because their championing of government action creates the problem. Finally, Dave Berry’s ‘How to Get Rich in Real Estate’ from Dave Berry’s Money Secrets was worth the price of admission ($2 from the clearance section of Half Price Books) for me. This hilarious satire skewers the lunacy of charlatans making money in real estate during the bubble. It also identifies the downsides of homeownership, like costs and maintenance, which rarely get told.
Someone much smarter than me might be able to piece together useful lessons from this book and make a killing during the next bubble. I can't. I'm just a common man hoping my 401(k) rises over the next 30 years. And the NFL playoffs are calling to me now.
Revealing Quotes
“Be wary of Wall Streeters threatening crashes. They are tempted to do this whenever you encroach on their turf. But they can’t cause a crash any more than they can prevent one.”
“From the Amsterdam tulip mania of 1637 to the bursting of London’s South Sea Bubble in 1720 to the Wall Street crash of 1929, the history of capitalism is replete with market panics. What is unusual is not that there was a crash in 1987 but that capital markets functioned for nearly 60 years without one.”
“[T]he techniques of program trading and the software used to practice them are very much human creations. Like all expert systems, they merely mimic the actions of a human expert, in this case a broker. The computer can only respond to events that have already happened and act according to the rules built in to the program by the broker. Thus, to blame the market’s rapid fall [on October 19, 1987] on the fact the computers are automatically executing decisions that brokers would have made anyway is to make the common mistake of blaming the tool for the actions of the people using it.”
“I want to step back a bit and try to put the various studies [of the October 19, 1987 crash] in perspective. Each was originally commissioned to determine what caused the crash. After some 2,000 or 3,000 pages the answer is, we still do not know what caused the crash. Much has been said about speculative euphoria, excessive price-earnings ratios, and the like. But the bottom line is that no one knows.”
“One of the implications of that disaster [i.e., the privatization of Russian natural resources after the fall of the Soviet Union] is that the Russian government not only acted corruptly, not only built up a new oligarchy of billionaires out of nothing, basically, but also gave away its most valuable financial assets—its ownership of the huge natural resource sector in Russia. Those resources could have been turned into real money, to be used to pay pensions, to close the budget deficit, to keep inflation low, to get the reforms underway. But they gave away those natural resources, and ended up instead relying on borrowing from international speculators and investors, at very high interest rates, on very short-term debts.”
“Like everything in advertising, someone does something differently, and it works incredibly well because no one else is doing it, and then everyone rushes to copy it, and it stops working because everyone is doing it. That’s basically the history of advertising in a nutshell.”
“The winners [of the late 1990’s and early 2000’s tech bubble] were the ones who took advantage of their irrational valuations to grow their own businesses and acquire assets of genuine value. . . . You could argue that this is what AOL did when it hooked up with Time Warner. And you have to admire the way Cisco used its stock, which was trading at mind-boggling multiples, to buy its way into a position of market dominance that has made those multiples halfway plausible. The savvy entrepreneurs converted fool’s gold into the 24k kind. So who’s the fool now?”
“What distinguished Silicon Valley from everyplace else on the planet was a) it had lots of start-up capital and b) the people who controlled that capital understood that, if you wanted to win big, you had to be willing to fail. Failure on Wall Street has always been construed as a crime. Failure in the valley was more honestly and bravely understood as the first cousin of success.”
“The 1987 stock market crash was blamed on program trading; the Asian currency crisis was blamed on some combination of hedge funds and IMF-induced policies; the Internet bubble was blamed on Wall Street analysts. The subprime-mortgage panic has yet to find its one big culprit, and I’m not sure it ever will. I’ve tried to include a glimpse of all the putative villains, but the task has proved impossible.”
“During the past decade, the Clinton and Bush Administrations have pursued the goal of increased homeownership by encouraging Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to expand their lending. ‘Owning something is freedom as far as I’m concerned,’ President Bush said recently. ‘It’s part of a free society.’ Thanks to low interest rates and to Fannie and Freddie, sixty-eight out of every hundred American households now own their homes, but worthy policies can have unintended consequences. Cheap money and declining lending standards are often associated with speculative peaks, which invariably are followed by busts.”
“Like many legendary market killings, from Warren Buffett’s takeovers of small companies in the ‘70’s to Wilbur Ross’s steelmaker consolidation earlier this decade, Mr. [John] Paulson’s sprang from defying conventional wisdom. In early 2006, the wisdom was that while loose lending standards might be of some concern, deep trouble in the housing and mortgage markets was unlikely. A lot of big Wall Street players were in this camp, as seen by the giant mortgage-market losses they’re disclosing. . . . George Soros invited Mr. Paulson to lunch, asking for details of how he laid his bets, with instruments that didn’t exist a few years ago [e.g., credit default swaps]. Mr. Soros is famous for another big score, a 1992 bet against the British pound that earned $1 billion for his Quantum hedge fund.”