盡管債券市場危機(jī)讓大投資銀行的收益報(bào)告充滿了變數(shù)，但有一個(gè)領(lǐng)域可以讓它們穩(wěn)操勝券：自身債務(wù)額下降所帶來的利潤。
這些投資銀行可以借此記入數(shù)億美元的利潤，從而幫助它們抵消因?qū)Ω軛U收購做出的融資承諾而需付出的數(shù)十億美元支出。
現(xiàn)在，一些銀行可能也會(huì)從它們自身的霉運(yùn)中獲得類似的收益。Analyst\'s Accounting Observer稱，花旗集團(tuán)(Citigroup Inc.)、美國銀行(Bank of America Corp.)和摩根大通(J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.)等金融巨頭都已經(jīng)在今年初表示，將開始對自身的部分債務(wù)按照市場價(jià)進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)。這些公司將在下個(gè)月公布第三季度業(yè)績。
這也意味著它們的利潤將因今年夏季信貸危機(jī)期間債務(wù)價(jià)值的下降而增加。Analyst\'s Accounting Observer表示，這些公司第三季度的收益報(bào)告中出現(xiàn)因債務(wù)而來的收益將一點(diǎn)也不令人奇怪。
花旗集團(tuán)、摩根大通和美國銀行的管理人員不予置評(píng)。
這些經(jīng)紀(jì)公司和銀行記入此類收益并無不當(dāng)或不妥。它們執(zhí)行的會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則允許這種做法。但一些投資者對此頗有微詞，稱不應(yīng)改變原準(zhǔn)則而允許記入這類收益。
該會(huì)計(jì)方法的原理是：比如某家銀行發(fā)行的1億美元債券的價(jià)值下降了5%，即500萬美元。根據(jù)這些銀行和經(jīng)紀(jì)公司采用的新會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則，一些債務(wù)是根據(jù)市場價(jià)計(jì)算的，而不是按照歷史成本計(jì)入。因此債券價(jià)值的下跌意味著這家銀行的債務(wù)減少了500萬美元。目前的價(jià)值9,500萬美元和當(dāng)初1億美元之間的差額就相當(dāng)于收益，將會(huì)反映到損益表中，從而提高利潤。相反，如果債券價(jià)值上升，則意味著銀行的債務(wù)增加，從而導(dǎo)致利潤下降。
這些銀行的任何收益都可能會(huì)在原本令人堪憂的這個(gè)財(cái)季帶來一個(gè)驚喜。銀行可能不得不沖減對杠桿收購做出的融資承諾的價(jià)值，并需要增加不良貸款的準(zhǔn)備金。
本周初，花旗集團(tuán)分析師凱斯•霍諾維茨(Keith Horowitz)將他對美國銀行第三季度的每股收益預(yù)期從1.20美元下調(diào)至0.85美元，稱原因在于近期金融市場的動(dòng)蕩和這些銀行可能需要因消費(fèi)者貸款業(yè)務(wù)而增加貸款損失準(zhǔn)備金。
上周晚些時(shí)候，雷曼兄弟(Lehman)分析師賈森•戈德伯格(Jason Goldberg)將花旗集團(tuán)的第三季度每股收益預(yù)期從1.12美元下調(diào)至1.05美元，將摩根大通的每股收益預(yù)期從1.08美元下調(diào)至1.01美元。
由債務(wù)所帶來的收益盡管在總體市場低迷的情況下只是杯水車薪，但這種情況還是再次引發(fā)了早就存在的關(guān)于是否應(yīng)允許記入這類利潤的爭論。公司用這種方式獲利的機(jī)會(huì)只是最近才出現(xiàn)的，原因是新會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則允許企業(yè)對其債務(wù)采用市場價(jià)計(jì)算。
反對記入此類所得的人擔(dān)心，這會(huì)導(dǎo)致收益質(zhì)量的下降，并可能讓公司高管找到一條操縱收益的新途徑。
對于這種情況，穆迪公司(Moody\'s Corp.)敦促債券持有人忽略這種新的利潤。這家評(píng)級(jí)機(jī)構(gòu)表示，在收益中加入此類所得會(huì)產(chǎn)生有違直覺和誤導(dǎo)性的業(yè)績，它不認(rèn)為這是核心的可持續(xù)性收益。
甚至一些支持采用市場化合理價(jià)值的人也對公司利用自身負(fù)債額的下降記入收益表示了擔(dān)憂。財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)委員會(huì)(Financial Accounting Standards Board)委員萊斯利•塞德曼(Leslie Seidman)說，允許這種結(jié)果反映到損益表中的做法不夠成熟。財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)委員會(huì)采用了允許公司記入這類所得的會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則。
不過經(jīng)紀(jì)公司的管理人員為此類所得進(jìn)行了辯護(hù)，稱這并不只是會(huì)計(jì)技巧。貝爾斯登(Bear Stearns)首席財(cái)務(wù)長薩姆•莫利納羅(Sam Molinaro)在公司的收益電話會(huì)議上說，這些所得是真實(shí)的，交易的另一面的確有人出現(xiàn)了損失。
莫利納羅還說，它的公司可以很輕松地使用金融工具消除或是對沖貝爾斯登自身信貸價(jià)值變化所產(chǎn)生的影響。但他表示，公司并未這樣做。貝爾斯登后來承認(rèn)，出售給投資者的結(jié)構(gòu)性票據(jù)價(jià)值的變化給公司帶來約2.25億美元所得。
允許公司利用自身債務(wù)的下降提高利潤的想法在當(dāng)初會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則的制訂者對此進(jìn)行討論時(shí)就曾引起過爭議。但一些公司，尤其是金融業(yè)中的企業(yè)表示，如果規(guī)則制訂者鼓勵(lì)使用市場價(jià)，就應(yīng)該允許企業(yè)對所有金融資產(chǎn)和負(fù)債使用這一準(zhǔn)則。此外，金融企業(yè)還表示，要求它們對衍生合約的價(jià)值采用市場價(jià)沒有意義。衍生合約可以對沖公司自身債務(wù)的價(jià)值。
賓西法尼亞州立大學(xué)(Pennsylvania State University)會(huì)計(jì)學(xué)教授愛德華•凱茲(Edward Ketz)說，這會(huì)帶來會(huì)計(jì)上的搭配混亂，結(jié)果也是違反直覺的。
凱茲說，這也要求投資者重新考慮應(yīng)如何評(píng)價(jià)一家公司的負(fù)債權(quán)益比率。在過去，我們會(huì)想如果一家企業(yè)出現(xiàn)問題，負(fù)債比率可能會(huì)上升，但現(xiàn)在如果它們表現(xiàn)不好，債務(wù)的價(jià)值會(huì)出現(xiàn)下降。
David Reilly
While the bond-market mess made the earnings reports for the big investment banks feel like a game of roulette, there was one area where they were almost guaranteed to win: profits generated by the falling value of their own debt.
That allowed the firms to book hundreds of millions of dollars in profit, helping to offset multibillion-dollar charges they had to take on commitments to fund leveraged buyouts.
Now some banks may be set to similarly benefit from their own misfortune. Financial titans such as Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp., and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., which will report third-quarter results next month, all opted earlier this year to start applying market values to some of their own liabilities, according to the research service the Analyst\'s Accounting Observer.
This means they, too, might see a boost to profit from declines in the value of their debts during the summer credit crunch. \'It might not be unusual at all to be seeing gains on debt issued hitting earnings in the third quarter,\' the Analyst\'s Accounting Observer said.
Officials at Citigroup, J.P. Morgan and Bank of America declined to comment.
The brokers and banks are doing nothing wrong or improper in booking such gains. The accounting rules as they stand allow the practice. But some investors are crying foul, saying the rules shouldn\'t have been changed to allow for such gains.
Here is how the accounting method works: Say $100 million of bonds issued by a bank falls in value by $5 million, or 5%. Under new accounting rules adopted by the banks and brokerages, some liabilities are valued at market prices instead of being recorded at their historical cost. The decline in the bonds\' value means the bank\'s liabilities fell by $5 million. The difference between the current price of $95 million and the original $100 million creates an equivalent gain that ends up on the income statement and boosts profits. Conversely, if the bonds gained in value, it would mean the bank\'s liabilities went up, producing a loss.
Any gains at the banks could potentially offer one bright spot in what is expected to be an otherwise gloomy quarter. Banks likely face write-downs in the value of commitments that they have made to fund leveraged buyouts and will need to increase reserves for soured loans.
Earlier this week, Citigroup analyst Keith Horowitz cut his third-quarter earnings-per-share estimate for Bank of America to 85 cents from $1.20, citing the recent financial-market turmoil and the likely need for the bank to increase loan-loss reserves because of its exposure to consumer lending.
Late last week, Lehman analyst Jason Goldberg lowered his third-quarter earnings estimate for Citigroup to $1.05 a share from $1.12, while reducing his estimate for J.P. Morgan to $1.01 from $1.08.
The emergence of debt-induced gains, even if they only offer a slight respite from overall market woes, has rekindled longstanding debate about whether such profits should be allowed. The opportunity for companies to benefit in this way only recently emerged, thanks to new accounting rules that allow companies to apply market prices to their own liabilities.
Opponents of the practice of booking such gains worry that they erode earnings quality and possibly open a new way for executives to massage earnings.
In the wake of the brokers\' results, Moody\'s Corp. urged bondholders to ignore this new kind of profit. The ratings firm said the inclusion of such gains in earnings \'can produce counterintuitive and misleading results\' and that it doesn\'t consider them \'to be core, sustainable earnings.\'
Even some supporters of the use of market, or fair, values remain uneasy with companies booking gains on declines in the value of their own debt. \'It was premature to allow the effect of that to come through the income statement,\' said Leslie Seidman, a member of the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the body that adopted the rule that allows companies to book these gains.
Yet brokerage executives defended the gains, saying they were more than just an accounting gimmick. During his firm\'s earnings call, Sam Molinaro, Bear Stearns\'s chief financial officer, said \'the gains were real,\' adding that \'there\'s someone on the other side of that trade who lost money.\'
Mr. Molinaro added that his firm could have easily used financial instruments to cancel out, or hedge, the impact of any change in the value of Bear\'s own credit standing. But the firm ruled that out, he said. Bear later recognized about $225 million in gains from the change in value of structured notes it sold investors.
The idea of allowing companies to profit from falls in their own liabilities proved controversial when accounting rule makers debated the idea. But many companies, especially in the financial sector, argued that if the rule makers were going to encourage the use of market values, they should allow companies to use them for all their financial assets and liabilities. In addition, financial firms argued that it didn\'t make sense to require them to use market prices for the value of a derivative contract that may be hedging the value of a company\'s own liabilities, which would be recorded at its cost.
That would have produced an accounting mismatch, said Edward Ketz, an accounting professor at Pennsylvania State University. Still, the outcome is \'counterintuitive,\' he added.
It may also require investors to \'rethink how we are going to evaluate a company\'s debt-to-equity ratio,\' Prof. Ketz said. \'In the past, we would think that if a firm was having problems they would show a higher debt ratio, but now if they are performing poorly, the debt is going to be going down in value.\'
這些投資銀行可以借此記入數(shù)億美元的利潤，從而幫助它們抵消因?qū)Ω軛U收購做出的融資承諾而需付出的數(shù)十億美元支出。
現(xiàn)在，一些銀行可能也會(huì)從它們自身的霉運(yùn)中獲得類似的收益。Analyst\'s Accounting Observer稱，花旗集團(tuán)(Citigroup Inc.)、美國銀行(Bank of America Corp.)和摩根大通(J.P. Morgan Chase & Co.)等金融巨頭都已經(jīng)在今年初表示，將開始對自身的部分債務(wù)按照市場價(jià)進(jìn)行統(tǒng)計(jì)。這些公司將在下個(gè)月公布第三季度業(yè)績。
這也意味著它們的利潤將因今年夏季信貸危機(jī)期間債務(wù)價(jià)值的下降而增加。Analyst\'s Accounting Observer表示，這些公司第三季度的收益報(bào)告中出現(xiàn)因債務(wù)而來的收益將一點(diǎn)也不令人奇怪。
花旗集團(tuán)、摩根大通和美國銀行的管理人員不予置評(píng)。
這些經(jīng)紀(jì)公司和銀行記入此類收益并無不當(dāng)或不妥。它們執(zhí)行的會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則允許這種做法。但一些投資者對此頗有微詞，稱不應(yīng)改變原準(zhǔn)則而允許記入這類收益。
該會(huì)計(jì)方法的原理是：比如某家銀行發(fā)行的1億美元債券的價(jià)值下降了5%，即500萬美元。根據(jù)這些銀行和經(jīng)紀(jì)公司采用的新會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則，一些債務(wù)是根據(jù)市場價(jià)計(jì)算的，而不是按照歷史成本計(jì)入。因此債券價(jià)值的下跌意味著這家銀行的債務(wù)減少了500萬美元。目前的價(jià)值9,500萬美元和當(dāng)初1億美元之間的差額就相當(dāng)于收益，將會(huì)反映到損益表中，從而提高利潤。相反，如果債券價(jià)值上升，則意味著銀行的債務(wù)增加，從而導(dǎo)致利潤下降。
這些銀行的任何收益都可能會(huì)在原本令人堪憂的這個(gè)財(cái)季帶來一個(gè)驚喜。銀行可能不得不沖減對杠桿收購做出的融資承諾的價(jià)值，并需要增加不良貸款的準(zhǔn)備金。
本周初，花旗集團(tuán)分析師凱斯•霍諾維茨(Keith Horowitz)將他對美國銀行第三季度的每股收益預(yù)期從1.20美元下調(diào)至0.85美元，稱原因在于近期金融市場的動(dòng)蕩和這些銀行可能需要因消費(fèi)者貸款業(yè)務(wù)而增加貸款損失準(zhǔn)備金。
上周晚些時(shí)候，雷曼兄弟(Lehman)分析師賈森•戈德伯格(Jason Goldberg)將花旗集團(tuán)的第三季度每股收益預(yù)期從1.12美元下調(diào)至1.05美元，將摩根大通的每股收益預(yù)期從1.08美元下調(diào)至1.01美元。
由債務(wù)所帶來的收益盡管在總體市場低迷的情況下只是杯水車薪，但這種情況還是再次引發(fā)了早就存在的關(guān)于是否應(yīng)允許記入這類利潤的爭論。公司用這種方式獲利的機(jī)會(huì)只是最近才出現(xiàn)的，原因是新會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則允許企業(yè)對其債務(wù)采用市場價(jià)計(jì)算。
反對記入此類所得的人擔(dān)心，這會(huì)導(dǎo)致收益質(zhì)量的下降，并可能讓公司高管找到一條操縱收益的新途徑。
對于這種情況，穆迪公司(Moody\'s Corp.)敦促債券持有人忽略這種新的利潤。這家評(píng)級(jí)機(jī)構(gòu)表示，在收益中加入此類所得會(huì)產(chǎn)生有違直覺和誤導(dǎo)性的業(yè)績，它不認(rèn)為這是核心的可持續(xù)性收益。
甚至一些支持采用市場化合理價(jià)值的人也對公司利用自身負(fù)債額的下降記入收益表示了擔(dān)憂。財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)委員會(huì)(Financial Accounting Standards Board)委員萊斯利•塞德曼(Leslie Seidman)說，允許這種結(jié)果反映到損益表中的做法不夠成熟。財(cái)務(wù)會(huì)計(jì)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)委員會(huì)采用了允許公司記入這類所得的會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則。
不過經(jīng)紀(jì)公司的管理人員為此類所得進(jìn)行了辯護(hù)，稱這并不只是會(huì)計(jì)技巧。貝爾斯登(Bear Stearns)首席財(cái)務(wù)長薩姆•莫利納羅(Sam Molinaro)在公司的收益電話會(huì)議上說，這些所得是真實(shí)的，交易的另一面的確有人出現(xiàn)了損失。
莫利納羅還說，它的公司可以很輕松地使用金融工具消除或是對沖貝爾斯登自身信貸價(jià)值變化所產(chǎn)生的影響。但他表示，公司并未這樣做。貝爾斯登后來承認(rèn)，出售給投資者的結(jié)構(gòu)性票據(jù)價(jià)值的變化給公司帶來約2.25億美元所得。
允許公司利用自身債務(wù)的下降提高利潤的想法在當(dāng)初會(huì)計(jì)準(zhǔn)則的制訂者對此進(jìn)行討論時(shí)就曾引起過爭議。但一些公司，尤其是金融業(yè)中的企業(yè)表示，如果規(guī)則制訂者鼓勵(lì)使用市場價(jià)，就應(yīng)該允許企業(yè)對所有金融資產(chǎn)和負(fù)債使用這一準(zhǔn)則。此外，金融企業(yè)還表示，要求它們對衍生合約的價(jià)值采用市場價(jià)沒有意義。衍生合約可以對沖公司自身債務(wù)的價(jià)值。
賓西法尼亞州立大學(xué)(Pennsylvania State University)會(huì)計(jì)學(xué)教授愛德華•凱茲(Edward Ketz)說，這會(huì)帶來會(huì)計(jì)上的搭配混亂，結(jié)果也是違反直覺的。
凱茲說，這也要求投資者重新考慮應(yīng)如何評(píng)價(jià)一家公司的負(fù)債權(quán)益比率。在過去，我們會(huì)想如果一家企業(yè)出現(xiàn)問題，負(fù)債比率可能會(huì)上升，但現(xiàn)在如果它們表現(xiàn)不好，債務(wù)的價(jià)值會(huì)出現(xiàn)下降。
David Reilly
While the bond-market mess made the earnings reports for the big investment banks feel like a game of roulette, there was one area where they were almost guaranteed to win: profits generated by the falling value of their own debt.
That allowed the firms to book hundreds of millions of dollars in profit, helping to offset multibillion-dollar charges they had to take on commitments to fund leveraged buyouts.
Now some banks may be set to similarly benefit from their own misfortune. Financial titans such as Citigroup Inc., Bank of America Corp., and J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., which will report third-quarter results next month, all opted earlier this year to start applying market values to some of their own liabilities, according to the research service the Analyst\'s Accounting Observer.
This means they, too, might see a boost to profit from declines in the value of their debts during the summer credit crunch. \'It might not be unusual at all to be seeing gains on debt issued hitting earnings in the third quarter,\' the Analyst\'s Accounting Observer said.
Officials at Citigroup, J.P. Morgan and Bank of America declined to comment.
The brokers and banks are doing nothing wrong or improper in booking such gains. The accounting rules as they stand allow the practice. But some investors are crying foul, saying the rules shouldn\'t have been changed to allow for such gains.
Here is how the accounting method works: Say $100 million of bonds issued by a bank falls in value by $5 million, or 5%. Under new accounting rules adopted by the banks and brokerages, some liabilities are valued at market prices instead of being recorded at their historical cost. The decline in the bonds\' value means the bank\'s liabilities fell by $5 million. The difference between the current price of $95 million and the original $100 million creates an equivalent gain that ends up on the income statement and boosts profits. Conversely, if the bonds gained in value, it would mean the bank\'s liabilities went up, producing a loss.
Any gains at the banks could potentially offer one bright spot in what is expected to be an otherwise gloomy quarter. Banks likely face write-downs in the value of commitments that they have made to fund leveraged buyouts and will need to increase reserves for soured loans.
Earlier this week, Citigroup analyst Keith Horowitz cut his third-quarter earnings-per-share estimate for Bank of America to 85 cents from $1.20, citing the recent financial-market turmoil and the likely need for the bank to increase loan-loss reserves because of its exposure to consumer lending.
Late last week, Lehman analyst Jason Goldberg lowered his third-quarter earnings estimate for Citigroup to $1.05 a share from $1.12, while reducing his estimate for J.P. Morgan to $1.01 from $1.08.
The emergence of debt-induced gains, even if they only offer a slight respite from overall market woes, has rekindled longstanding debate about whether such profits should be allowed. The opportunity for companies to benefit in this way only recently emerged, thanks to new accounting rules that allow companies to apply market prices to their own liabilities.
Opponents of the practice of booking such gains worry that they erode earnings quality and possibly open a new way for executives to massage earnings.
In the wake of the brokers\' results, Moody\'s Corp. urged bondholders to ignore this new kind of profit. The ratings firm said the inclusion of such gains in earnings \'can produce counterintuitive and misleading results\' and that it doesn\'t consider them \'to be core, sustainable earnings.\'
Even some supporters of the use of market, or fair, values remain uneasy with companies booking gains on declines in the value of their own debt. \'It was premature to allow the effect of that to come through the income statement,\' said Leslie Seidman, a member of the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the body that adopted the rule that allows companies to book these gains.
Yet brokerage executives defended the gains, saying they were more than just an accounting gimmick. During his firm\'s earnings call, Sam Molinaro, Bear Stearns\'s chief financial officer, said \'the gains were real,\' adding that \'there\'s someone on the other side of that trade who lost money.\'
Mr. Molinaro added that his firm could have easily used financial instruments to cancel out, or hedge, the impact of any change in the value of Bear\'s own credit standing. But the firm ruled that out, he said. Bear later recognized about $225 million in gains from the change in value of structured notes it sold investors.
The idea of allowing companies to profit from falls in their own liabilities proved controversial when accounting rule makers debated the idea. But many companies, especially in the financial sector, argued that if the rule makers were going to encourage the use of market values, they should allow companies to use them for all their financial assets and liabilities. In addition, financial firms argued that it didn\'t make sense to require them to use market prices for the value of a derivative contract that may be hedging the value of a company\'s own liabilities, which would be recorded at its cost.
That would have produced an accounting mismatch, said Edward Ketz, an accounting professor at Pennsylvania State University. Still, the outcome is \'counterintuitive,\' he added.
It may also require investors to \'rethink how we are going to evaluate a company\'s debt-to-equity ratio,\' Prof. Ketz said. \'In the past, we would think that if a firm was having problems they would show a higher debt ratio, but now if they are performing poorly, the debt is going to be going down in value.\'