{"id":1841,"date":"2008-02-22T23:38:16","date_gmt":"2008-02-23T03:38:16","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.prefblog.com\/?p=1841"},"modified":"2008-02-22T23:38:16","modified_gmt":"2008-02-23T03:38:16","slug":"february-22-2008","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/?p=1841","title":{"rendered":"February 22, 2008"},"content":{"rendered":"

Not much today! I did, however, post about RS’s attitude towards icebergs<\/a> and Inflation Expectations<\/a> … you guys will just have to make do with that.<\/p>\n

I see there are rumours of an Ambac rescue<\/a>:<\/p>\n

Banks may invest about $3 billion in the company, said the person, who declined to be named because no details have been set. The New York-based company rose 16 percent<\/a> in New York Stock Exchange trading today after CNBC Television said Ambac and its banks were preparing to announce a deal.
\n…<\/strong>
\nA rescue that enabled Ambac to retain its AAA rating for the municipal and asset-backed securities guaranty units would help banks and municipal debt investors avoid losses on securities it guarantees. Banks stood to lose as much as $70 billion if the top-rated bond insurers, which include MBIA Inc.<\/a> and FGIC Corp.<\/a>, lose their credit ratings, Oppenheimer & Co. analysts estimated.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Let me see if I have this straight … the banks are looking at a mark-to-market\u00a0loss of $70-billion, which they can avoid with an investment of … oh, call it $10-billion, if Ambac gets three. How can anybody talk about market efficiency with a straight face?<\/p>\n

Volume picked up today and performance was good … nothing earthshattering, but given that down days are currently rare, monny a mickle maks a muckle. As they say.<\/p>\n

\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Note that these indices are experimental; the absolute and relative daily values are expected to change in the final version. In this version, index values are based at 1,000.0 on 2006-6-30<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Index<\/td>\nMean Current Yield (at bid)<\/td>\nMean YTW<\/td>\nMean Average Trading Value<\/td>\nMean Mod Dur (YTW)<\/td>\nIssues<\/td>\nDay’s Perf.<\/td>\nIndex Value<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Ratchet<\/td>\n5.52%<\/td>\n5.56%<\/td>\n40,919<\/td>\n14.5<\/td>\n2<\/td>\n-0.0994%<\/td>\n1,080.4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Fixed-Floater<\/td>\n5.01%<\/td>\n5.68%<\/td>\n74,305<\/td>\n14.66<\/td>\n7<\/td>\n+0.1006%<\/td>\n1,024.1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Floater<\/td>\n4.93%<\/td>\n4.99%<\/td>\n69,111<\/td>\n15.46<\/td>\n3<\/td>\n+0.4983%<\/td>\n857.6<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Op. Retract<\/td>\n4.80%<\/td>\n2.17%<\/td>\n77,970<\/td>\n2.71<\/td>\n15<\/td>\n+0.1666%<\/td>\n1,049.7<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Split-Share<\/td>\n5.27%<\/td>\n5.43%<\/td>\n98,908<\/td>\n4.11<\/td>\n15<\/td>\n+0.4300%<\/td>\n1,047.4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Interest Bearing<\/td>\n6.21%<\/td>\n6.27%<\/td>\n58,091<\/td>\n3.35<\/td>\n4<\/td>\n+0.3539%<\/td>\n1,087.0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Perpetual-Premium<\/td>\n5.70%<\/td>\n3.98%<\/td>\n348,148<\/td>\n5.07<\/td>\n16<\/td>\n+0.0956%<\/td>\n1,033.4<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Perpetual-Discount<\/td>\n5.34%<\/td>\n5.38%<\/td>\n279,272<\/td>\n14.84<\/td>\n52<\/td>\n+0.0077%<\/td>\n963.1<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Major Price Changes<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Issue<\/td>\nIndex<\/td>\nChange<\/td>\nNotes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BNA.PR.C<\/td>\nSplitShare<\/td>\n+1.0401%<\/td>\nAsset coverage of 3.3+:1 as of\u00a0January 31, according to the company<\/a>. Now with a pre-tax bid-YTW of\u00a06.78% based on a bid of 20.40 and a hardMaturity<\/a> 2019-1-10 at 25.00. Compare with BNA.PR.A (5.19%\u00a0to 2008-10-31 call) and BNA.PR.B (7.03% to 2016-3-25 maturity).\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BSD.PR.A<\/td>\nInterestBearing<\/td>\n+1.0515%<\/td>\nAsset coverage of 1.6+:1 as of February 15, according to Brookfield Funds<\/a>. Now with a pre-tax bid-YTW of 6.97% (mostly as interest)\u00a0based on a bid of\u00a09.61 and a\u00a0hardMaturity 2015-3-31 at 10.00.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BCE.PR.C<\/td>\nFixFloat<\/td>\n+1.0947%<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
FTU.PR.A<\/td>\nSplitShare<\/td>\n+1.1446%<\/td>\nAsset coverage of just under 1.6:1 as of February 15, according to the company<\/a> Now with a pre-tax bid-YTW of 6.04% based on a bid of\u00a09.72 and a hardMaturity 2012-12-1 at 10.00.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
MFC.PR.A<\/td>\nOpRet<\/td>\n+1.2367%<\/td>\nNow with a pre-tax bid-YTW of 3.23% (!)\u00a0based on a bid of 26.45 and a softMaturity<\/a> 2015-12-18 at 25.00.\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
MFC.PR.B<\/td>\nPerpetualDiscount<\/td>\n+1.2549%<\/td>\nNow with a pre-tax bid-YTW of 5.02% based on a bid of\u00a023.16 and a limitMaturity<\/a>.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BNA.PR.B<\/td>\nSplitShare<\/td>\n+1.4392%<\/td>\nSee BNA.PR.C, above.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
MFC.PR.C<\/td>\nPerpetualDiscount<\/td>\n+1.5200%<\/td>\nThis is exciting! Now with a pre-tax bid-YTW of 5.00% (actually, I make it 4.9971%) based on a bid of 22.51 and a\u00a0limitMaturity. It’s been a long time since a PerpetualDiscount yielded less than 5.00% … September 26, 2007, in fact.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BAM.PR.B<\/td>\nFloater<\/td>\n+1.6393%<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Volume Highlights<\/strong><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Issue<\/td>\nIndex<\/td>\nVolume<\/td>\nNotes<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BAM.PR.N<\/td>\nPerpetualDiscount<\/td>\n309,820<\/td>\nNow with a pre-tax bid-YTW of 6.44% based on a bid of\u00a018.80 and a limitMaturity.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
CM.PR.H<\/td>\nPerpetualDiscount<\/td>\n95,100<\/td>\nNow with a pre-tax bid-YTW of 5.54% based on a bid of 21.89 and a limitMaturity.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BCE.PR.C<\/td>\nFixFloat<\/td>\n73,300<\/td>\n\u00a0<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
BAM.PR.M<\/td>\nPerpetualDiscount<\/td>\n42,725<\/td>\nDundee (who?) bought 35,000 from RBC at 19.10. Now with a pre-tax bid-YTW of 6.35% based on a bid of\u00a019.06 and a limitMaturity.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
RY.PR.B<\/td>\nPerpetualDiscount<\/td>\n23,100<\/td>\nNow with a pre-tax bid-YTW of 5.22% based on a bid of 22.64 and a limitMaturity.<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/table>\n<\/div>\n

There were\u00a0twenty other index-included $25-pv-equivalent issues trading over 10,000 shares today.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Not much today! I did, however, post about RS’s attitude towards icebergs and Inflation Expectations … you guys will just have to make do with that. I see there are rumours of an Ambac rescue: …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1841","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-market-action"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1841","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1841"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1841\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1841"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1841"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/prefblog.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1841"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}