A tale of one country and its banking system, yet two stories:
- Canada rated world’s soundest bank system.
Canada has the world’s soundest banking system, closely followed by Sweden, Luxembourg and Australia, a survey by the World Economic Forum has found as financial crisis and bank failures shake world markets.
But Britain, which once ranked in the top five, has slipped to 44th place behind El Salvador and Peru, after a 50 billion pound ($86.5 billion) pledge this week by the government to bolster bank balance sheets.
The United States, where some of Wall Street’s biggest financial names have collapsed in recent weeks, rated only 40, just behind Germany at 39, and smaller states such as Barbados, Estonia and even Namibia, in southern Africa.
In an indication of the uncertainty in the markets, Canada’s private banks declined to pass on to consumers the full half percentage point cut in interest rates announced by central banks around the world.
The banks cut interest a quarter of a point instead, the first time since the Asian financial crisis in 1997 that they haven’t followed what Canada’s central bank has done.
Hmm…I worked for Canada’s largest bank in the credit card unit when I was completing my degree in finance (I wanted to move to their investment banking unit… didn’t happen, so I ventured online).
Some thoughts:
- Unlike the US that deregulated banking, Canada’s deregulation was modest: banks could acquire investment banks and insurance firms (”the pillars”) but they could not merge. Bear in mind, Canada’s system is an oligopoly with a whopping five main banks. As such, each one is fairly robust even though some crisis have knocked out a lot of value out of each one at various times (example: due to Long Term Capital Management, CIBC closed a helluva lot of branches to offset losses).
- It will be interesting to see how Canada reacts to the American maelstrom. The saying is “when the US sneezes, Canada catches a cold”. Right now, however, I think the storm’s winds aren’t necessarily headed north. Time will tell.
Digg this Blog
Share on Facebook
WatchMojo on Twitter
WatchMojo on YouTube
Add to Favorites
WatchMojo NewsletterNope. Here is why: media companies should be buying up companies but they won’t, they won’t learn from history. Some of the best buys took place during downturns (Time Warner buying Advertising.com, for example, in 2003, for $430M). While some of these companies have cash on hand, their stock is not too rich, meaning that stock can’t really be used as currency. And nowadays, no one wants to part with cash.
Marketwatch has a rundown of the carnage:
- Time Warner Inc., the world’s largest media company, hit a five-year low of $9.94 before closing at $10.09, down 6.4%.
- News Corp., dropped nearly 10% to close at its lowest price in more than five years at $9.01.
- Viacom Inc. gave up 5.7% to close at a five-year bottom of $20.08.
- CBS Corp. fell as low as $10.13, as the shares hovered at their worst level in 10 years. The stock lost 11.2% on the session.
- Sony fell to a new 12-month low of $23.
- NBC majority parent General Electric Co. hit a fresh one-year low of $19.
In the cable sector,
- Cablevision Systems Corp. fell 2.8% to close at $16.88 after reaching its 52-week low of $16.14.
- Comcast Corp. fell to a one-year bottom of $16.08, closing at $16.31.
Among newspaper stocks:
- New York Times Co. fell 8.2% to close at $12.17;
- Gannett Co. gave up 8.5% to $13.37,
- Media General Inc. fell 18% to $8.91.
The idea in investing is buy low, sell high. Are there really any of these media stocks worth buying, though?
Update: SAI’s Peter Kafka points to a piece in FT.com:
Clearly, startups will have to adapt, this means operationally but also with regards to expectations in an M&A. However, I am not sure big media has the stomach for deals now.
Case in point: here are a couple of email exchanges from today:
Exchange 1:
Me: “I am sure you folks are having fun in this market, a lot of companies that were probably too expensive must be awfully cheaper (ie. less demanding) nowadays.”
Media executive #1: “Expectations have definitely come down. We are seeing a lot of well funded companies looking to sell everything for <$100k. It’s fire sale time.”
Me: ” It’s healthy and about time.
- A company approached us with 500 mojo related domain names (BerlinMojo, NYCMojo, etc). I’ve always envisioned having local sites… they initially wanted a ridiculously high price. We balked. Then they sold all 500 for $2,000.
- Last year when we were looking at VC, they would always demand that we boost our burn rate to well over $250,000 per month. I’d ask: “for what?” - today we’re breaking even… with no VC. If I would have raised money, we’d have roughly the same revenue, but we’d be losing money; and VCs would pull the rug from beneath us depending on their mood in the morning.”
Exchange 2:
Me: “This week I’ve gotten a couple of emails from people (CEO/Board/VC) asking us if we want to buy very-well-funded companies for pennies on the dollar. Cuh-razy… I couldn’t afford them anyway… but it’s crazy that people are just looking to get out of losing propositions so quickly. It’s a reflection of the higher cost of capital, and the credit crunch.”
Media executive #2: “We are in some very interesting times…buying opportunity if you have the stomach for it, in my opinion – what do you think?”
Me: “Yes, I think the web remains a great place to be investing now these days; recall that companies who were buying in 2003-05 ended up making good bets (AOL/Advertising.com). However, I am not sure if traditional media has learned their lesson. While they should be buying up assets now, I think they will stay on the sidelines. For example, CBS was probably willing to spend $1.8B on CNET in good times but if CNET was worth $800M today it would not spend $1B on it today… not sure if that makes sense or you agree, but that is how I read Big Media behavior.
CNET was a good fit for CBS, however, the faddish areas are that much less interesting all of a sudden: areas like UGC and social media become a harder sell:
- Why would anyone buy Digg now for example if it is so painfully clear that it’s not what advertisers want. NYT has more inventory than it knows what to do with, for example.
- How can you justify Slide’s or Facebook’s valuation, for example.
You cannot, and in many ways it will look like Priceline being worth more than all airline company stocks when it IPO’d: lunacy.
On my end, I did not raise capital but on the one hand, I do wish I had more leverage because we can do a lot more now. The local network is a good example: we bought 500 URLs for $2,000. The guy initially wanted $50,000 (!).
Then again, we’re profitable because we did not raise money and were not forced to invest and up our burn rate… so net-net, no complaints for me. We’ve booked more revenues in 2008Q1-3 than we did in all of 2007 and more have more commitments for 2009 than we’ve had sales in all of 2008… I just hope that those clients don’t disappear off the map, though… so we shall see.
Ash”
These are separate, but it gives you an insight into what is going on these days on the front lines.
PLAY
