As I understand it, all these write-downs of bad debt and subsequent bail-out proposals are derived from irresponsible mortgage lending. Behind it all, the expected defaults on these mortgages, together with falling asset prices have led to the bottom falling out of however this debt is packaged and repackaged etc.
If a loan is defaulted on, then I think a fair assumption is that 60% of the loan could be recovered through reposession and sale of the asset.
So if we are in the hole for, as has been suggested, $2.2tr, or £1.1tr then that equates to around 10 million defaults on £200k mortgages.
My questions are:-
1) How can losses be more than the underlying bad debt of mortgage default?
2) How wrong are my numbers?
3) How likely is it that 10 million is a vastly inflated figure? Seems like it to me....
4) If it is not a question of default on this scale, and in fact a question of banking recapitalisation hence the market for securities crashing - then surely there are other institutions that can take on this 'toxic' debt for a steal, obv. the government being one, but what about the SWF's etc.... Is there not one 'good' bank that cannot profit from the rest of the buffoons?
5) In fact, if they are having trouble marking these assets to market (hence the write-downs) then can they not just value the income stream of the debt rather than its market value? Surely this would result in much lesser write-downs...
Thanks, and don't excuse my ignorance - happy to be taken apart...
J