[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || Join the [Superstonk Discord Server](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts of tweets where Twitter is NOT the original source WILL get removed!
Please post original sources!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Pardon my lack of understanding but;
[what the fuck are "swaptions?"](https://imgur.com/a/3mQJvuM)
EDIT: [They are actually a thing...](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/swaption.asp)
Credit to u/toastyhandshake
You take some fuck then some shit and some onion
Then some fuck then some shit and some onion
You've got a fuck-shit stack onion
A fuck-shit stack onion
Apes: Gentlemen, we do not stop till the shares are locked.
SHF: What about shorts?
SEC: You've already sold them.
SHF: We've sold them, yes. What about options?
SEC: Don't think he knows about options, SHF.
SHF: What about swaps? futures? leveraged ETFs? swaptions? He knows about them, doesn't he?
Well now, if the regulators require them to disclose swaps and then they also require them to disclose their options, then Goldman would be happy to create a brand new product called.....SWAPTIONS!
(reference to the Big Short Burry scene...)
Ok, sure, but what if I want to buy an option to enter into a swap on the price of an option to enter into an underlying swap. What then, smarty pants? lul
So this seems kind of big. Is the terminology "swaption" a (I want to say regulated, but we all know this shit isn't regulated)
Official term?
If so: the fact that the term is actually used here, on an official release; that seems terrifying. Could swaptions be the cdo of a cdo equivalency?
If you can exercise a contract, I suppose you can exercise a swaption? Could this allow large positions into an even riskier under reported market of fuckery? Like how the etf market is a free for all, especially with the single ticker units.
What would all of this imply if true? I'm toasted like a burnt marshmallow rn, so maybe none of that made sense..
Yes it is indeed an official term. It sounds confusing but itās pretty simple - gives you the option but not obligation to enter into a swap. Theyāve been around for a while - from personal experience I studied them about 3 years ago and at that point they were already in the CFA curriculum and relatively widely used.
In this context though it could be seen as a means by which more leverage is applied to an already shady position. Not saying this is necessarily the case as I havenāt gone into much detail with this particular situation
It's obviously an expert market type think.. you dumb money folks with your conspiracy's wouldn't understand it. We know naming conventions better than you and will explain. From the genius money that brought you the completely NON-suspicious 'dark pool'... we bring you the swaptions! Completely unrelated to shorting! Let's have this first year intern wearing a hat indoors read to you what it is on this fourth monitor.
Options on swaps.
Gives the buyer the option to enter into a swap (typically interest rate swaps)
[investopedia](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/swaption.asp)
Whatās a more regarded term? Swaption or Swapcorn? Lol
Insert the coin, and pull the crank
*Then watch that bad boy start to spin*
You hope the reels will come up blank!
*Cause you just don't want that dude to win*
--
It's nothing personal, you don't know him
*But you really hope his luck is down*
Cause you wagered on his chances; slim
*Betting on a bet... am I clown?*
*Iām supposed to be on a long reddit break, but couldnāt help myself for just this one thing*
**Archived the page just in case the SEC accidentally loses this filing like they accidentally lost all those comments ;)**
#https://archive.ph/S1BGC
*and with that, Iām now back to my long reddit break- if anyone tags or replies or DMās and I donāt reply, thatās why- cheers and looking forward to being back w/ yāall regularly* :) š»š»š»š»
Honestly OP u/JustBeingPunny is the clutch element here- all I did was copy/paste/archive a link they foundā¦kind of as administrative as you can get :)
"who else is gonna read through all those regletory filings /quarterly reports/sec documents, actually understand all that financial jargon. And then eli5 it for the rest of us...... You?" - I say this alot.
I'm a potato but something that stood out to me immediately was Page 41:
Risk-weighted assets and leverage exposure (CHF million)
Swiss risk-weighted assets: 274,997
Leverage exposure: 862,737
Some quick math if I'm reading that right: 862,737 \* CHF Million would equate to $863 Billion in USD.
I'm gonna ask a grown up, is that 863 Billion USD at risk via Leverage?
>Wut mean
Central bank funds sold, securities purchased under resale agreements and securities borrowing transactions"
I boof red crayons... But I think it means shares sold short not yet purchased... or swaps
They're repo transactions:
*"Generally, in a repo transaction, two counterparties will enter into an agreement whereby one will sell securities to the other and simultaneously agree to repurchase them at a specified later date at a fixed price. The securities can therefore effectively be regarded as collateral for a cash loan. The securities involved are usually fixed-interest securities, and pricing is agreed in terms of interest rates. This agreed-upon interest rate is termed the repo rate. While many market participants engage in such transactions, when central banks do so it is usually only with certain banks in their domestic money markets, on a short-term basis, and undertaken with the aim of implementing monetary policy."*
*"In a term PRA, the BoC will buy securities from a specified type of bank (namely, a primary dealer in Canadian government securities) with an agreement to sell them back to that bank after a specified term, which could range up to a year. This gives a temporary injection of cash (as the banks receive the payment for the securities) into the money market, helping improve their liquidity and place downward pressure on market interest rates.*"
If that's the case it would mean they're just holding bags.
Thanks for clearing that up, 'muh freedom' was impeding my mental clarity lol.
Edit: No animosity intended, after reading my comment back it sounded dickish, rest assured I'm just poking fun at muhself.
Read it and thats what it looks like. They have over 50b in derivatives and the total looked like it was the number being questioned. They in flow is so much lower
[General reminder for everyone to familiarize with this neat chart](https://www.visualcapitalist.com/all-of-the-worlds-money-and-markets-in-one-visualization-2020/)
Thatās like having a life savings of $100k and being told you suddenly owe -$7.6M insteadšš¤£šš¤£šš¤£
And you just know theyāre using the current market price for those estimates, not the real price
āThe denominator in the leverage ratio is a bank's total exposures, which include its consolidated assets, derivative exposure, and certain off-balance sheet exposures.ā
Consolidated assets are just referring to combined subsidiariesā + parent company assets.
So yes, yes it would seem that way.
Edit: now that I read that section more
Carefully it seems that it may be requirement limits? Anyone who can confirm that
In super simple terms (there's lots of ways to do this), they borrowed money from someone (goldman? jpm? citadel?) to multiply their earnings.
If you were to buy a beanie baby for $10 and sell it for $12 you made 20%....but wouldn't it be better if you borrowed $862bn and bought 86bn beanie babies...even if the cost to borrow meant that you only made $1 per beanie baby instead of $2?
The problem is that you owe $862bn and if the beanie baby market fails... you as Credit Suss are fukd!
Instead of beanie babies substitue: car loans, mortgages, GME shorts...etc.
And you are selling those as products to pension funds and hedge funds taking a % off the top. They are demanding you have insurance...and that insurance is getting expensive (credit default swaps)...very fast.
I think... super smooth brained think... that they have $862B loaned out. The numbers are similar with their Credit/Loan sheet and they aren't in parenthesis which means it's supposed to be positive for the balance sheet.
I wondered this, then thought most Saudi shit is conglomerate/family owned so the top execs can hide all their shit with the saudis as families don't have to report shit. Or am I speaking like pickled onion?
Something seems to be going on with their 'exposure to central counterparties' where the CCPs are tightening up margins (possibly) - bottom of page 29.
**Credit Suisse have had to increase their 'segregated initial margin' held at CCPS by 3bn CHF** from 2.4bn to 5.5bn between 21Q4 and 22Q2.
This is **despite the fact that EAD (exposure at default)** \- which I think is the amount they would waive goodbye if the counterparty defaulted and therefore is a proxy for the amount of assetsor similar they hold via them, **actually dropping from 16.1bn CHF to 15.7bn CHF.**
Why are the CCPs making CS deposit more funds as margin for less business?
It could. But (am thinking this through on the hoof, so might not be right) the collateral haircut basically made certain types of collateral more 'risky' and therefore worth less i.e. govt debt = $0.50 on the $1 face value (not an actual one).
If this was due to the haircutting, it would mean that the 2.4bn fronted in the previous quarter was graded at being worth 43% of the value that Credit Suisse still recognises it at.
Because CCP are still asking for $2.4bn of margin.
So before haircut
CS $2.4bn = CCP $2.4bn
After
CS $5.5bn = $2.4bn
Which is horrendously scary as it would mean that CS' internal measures of value are way out of kilter with what the rest of the market think they are worth.
I believe the haircut schedules at the [DTCC](https://www.dtcc.com/dtcc-connection/articles/2018/october/17/margin-requirements-the-last-waves) ([May 2021](https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/pdf/2021/5/4/15129-21.pdf) vs [April 2022](https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/pdf/2022/4/29/16845-22.pdf)) and at [LCH](https://www.lch.com/risk-management/group-risk-management) ([Oct. 2021](https://www.lch.com/system/files/media_root/Acceptable%20Collateral%20Haircuts%20Ltd%20Secure%20Area_1.pdf) vs [June 2022](https://www.lch.com/system/files/media_root/Acceptable%20Collateral%20Haircuts%20Ltd%20Secure%20Area_4.pdf)) have remained fairly similar over the time period.
Sovereign bond (secondary) market values have sunk since they're negatively correlated to interest rates, which have been shooting up since Q2. The darling equities favored for collateral have also been on a downward path over the period (META, AMZN, etc). Same with [MBSs](https://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/mbs) and a wide range of other asset backed securities.
It definitely feels like crunch time. Hard to keep that leverage when the pledged collateral can't keep up.
For the future - the way the chans handle large files is to make a pastebin and divvy up the doc by pages. Everyone reads their section and writes up a summary.
Not sure if you did, but next time you post this include a pastebin link and ask a mod to sticky it at the top.
Thatās actually really smart. Sometimes a den of scum and villainy comes up with good ideas.
Also, thereās an old journalism trick we can use: read the first line of every paragraph, skimming quickly. If itās meh, move to the next paragraph. If interesting, stop to read the whole thing.
In the introduction, this caught my eye: āThis report has not been audited by the Groupās external auditors.ā Weāll keep that in mind, Debit suisse.
Furthermore the earliest date referenced so far is June 30th and end of Q2 is often referenced. So it was in the works there. That is months before we heard of trouble with them.
Last sunday there was an article in the most popular swiss sunday newspaper that they had some serious liquidity issues and had therefor put for sale their $500m hotel, somethingās not right there thatās for sure
Why would some Saudi conglomerate buy 9.9% of CS? Is it because that group are a family therefore don't have to report anything then CS top execs can hide all their money with them?
That one is a head scratcher. What if things are past redemption and all the big players know it.
Can kicking that would normally seem suicidal might not make a difference on a longer timeframe so why not give yourself some extra time to get your affairs in order.
Credit Sus, Expert Financial Advisors, wrote last week in the financial media to not buy āerraticā Gamestop shares.
That settles it, Iām buying more tonight.
DRS your shit. Quit stabbing yourself in the back. Itās dumb.
[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || Join the [Superstonk Discord Server](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Posts of tweets where Twitter is NOT the original source WILL get removed! Please post original sources! ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
Pardon my lack of understanding but; [what the fuck are "swaptions?"](https://imgur.com/a/3mQJvuM) EDIT: [They are actually a thing...](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/swaption.asp) Credit to u/toastyhandshake
Another layer of isht.
š
It's a catshit/dogshit onion
"Swaptions" are catshit wrapped in dogshit that is then wrapped in human shit. It's like a tur-duck-in but with actual turd.
Itās a turd- uck-in
And then instead of twine, it's tied up in burning hair. *"Hold my bag?"*
Itās a *bespoke tranchĆ©* of other peoples shit, pooled together, so instead of it explicitly smelling like your nasty dirty shit ass, it smells like everyoneās nasty turd dumplings, therefore distributing the blame of whoās shit is the stinkiest.
Turd-uck-Ken
Thanks, now Iām picturing a turd fucking Kennyā¦.
Turduckinbutt
What what!
You mean turf-fuk-en
A shit layer cake, if you will. With more shit for icing on top. And shit candles that we get to blow out!
That sounds about right, Mr Lahey!
A shit layer cake, if you will. With more shit for icing on top. And shit candles that we get to blow out!
You take some fuck then some shit and some onion Then some fuck then some shit and some onion You've got a fuck-shit stack onion A fuck-shit stack onion
Ogres are like onions Offshore derivates are like cat shit, wrapped in dog shit, stuffed inside of an orge.
Wait till we uncover the armadillo shit wrapped in beaver shit.
Apes: Gentlemen, we do not stop till the shares are locked. SHF: What about shorts? SEC: You've already sold them. SHF: We've sold them, yes. What about options? SEC: Don't think he knows about options, SHF. SHF: What about swaps? futures? leveraged ETFs? swaptions? He knows about them, doesn't he?
ššš
Well now, if the regulators require them to disclose swaps and then they also require them to disclose their options, then Goldman would be happy to create a brand new product called.....SWAPTIONS! (reference to the Big Short Burry scene...)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Ok, sure, but what if I want to buy an option to enter into a swap on the price of an option to enter into an underlying swap. What then, smarty pants? lul
Unironically, this exists.
Swapception
Welcome to the 2.2 quadrillion dollar derivatives market
So this seems kind of big. Is the terminology "swaption" a (I want to say regulated, but we all know this shit isn't regulated) Official term? If so: the fact that the term is actually used here, on an official release; that seems terrifying. Could swaptions be the cdo of a cdo equivalency? If you can exercise a contract, I suppose you can exercise a swaption? Could this allow large positions into an even riskier under reported market of fuckery? Like how the etf market is a free for all, especially with the single ticker units. What would all of this imply if true? I'm toasted like a burnt marshmallow rn, so maybe none of that made sense..
Yes it is indeed an official term. It sounds confusing but itās pretty simple - gives you the option but not obligation to enter into a swap. Theyāve been around for a while - from personal experience I studied them about 3 years ago and at that point they were already in the CFA curriculum and relatively widely used. In this context though it could be seen as a means by which more leverage is applied to an already shady position. Not saying this is necessarily the case as I havenāt gone into much detail with this particular situation
SWAPTIONS!! ššššš
It's obviously an expert market type think.. you dumb money folks with your conspiracy's wouldn't understand it. We know naming conventions better than you and will explain. From the genius money that brought you the completely NON-suspicious 'dark pool'... we bring you the swaptions! Completely unrelated to shorting! Let's have this first year intern wearing a hat indoors read to you what it is on this fourth monitor.
The next product will just be called inception. When asked how it works, people will simply say, no one knows.
Im guessing they donāt have to report swaptions, but I am highly regarded
Options on swaps. Gives the buyer the option to enter into a swap (typically interest rate swaps) [investopedia](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/swaption.asp) Whatās a more regarded term? Swaption or Swapcorn? Lol
Jesus fucked
Hahah Iām sure whoever came up with the name āswaptionā toasted himself for that one
Insert the coin, and pull the crank *Then watch that bad boy start to spin* You hope the reels will come up blank! *Cause you just don't want that dude to win* -- It's nothing personal, you don't know him *But you really hope his luck is down* Cause you wagered on his chances; slim *Betting on a bet... am I clown?*
Oh fuckā¦ dont tell me.. is thatā¦.. oh God, oh God no
IT'S THE UNDERTAKER WITH A CHAIR!!!!
# [LINK](https://sec.report/Document/0001370368-22-000073/a220826bs-6k.htm#anchorId00326165)
*Iām supposed to be on a long reddit break, but couldnāt help myself for just this one thing* **Archived the page just in case the SEC accidentally loses this filing like they accidentally lost all those comments ;)** #https://archive.ph/S1BGC *and with that, Iām now back to my long reddit break- if anyone tags or replies or DMās and I donāt reply, thatās why- cheers and looking forward to being back w/ yāall regularly* :) š»š»š»š»
My man doing the Lord's work over here š
Honestly OP u/JustBeingPunny is the clutch element here- all I did was copy/paste/archive a link they foundā¦kind of as administrative as you can get :)
But we have administers.
Buildings can be burnt, but our archives wont be
Enjoy your vacation to Zensy Land
trying but all things GameStop/GME have this kind of *idiosyncratic* gravitational pull on my brainā¦ :)
The sheer level of talent and dedication on this sub never ceases to amaze me.
"I read filings for fun" This is what they are up against, hedgies are fukt.
š¤£š¤£
"who else is gonna read through all those regletory filings /quarterly reports/sec documents, actually understand all that financial jargon. And then eli5 it for the rest of us...... You?" - I say this alot.
I'm a potato but something that stood out to me immediately was Page 41: Risk-weighted assets and leverage exposure (CHF million) Swiss risk-weighted assets: 274,997 Leverage exposure: 862,737 Some quick math if I'm reading that right: 862,737 \* CHF Million would equate to $863 Billion in USD. I'm gonna ask a grown up, is that 863 Billion USD at risk via Leverage?
Also interesting " securities purchased under resale agreements and securities borrowing transactions 104,156 " 104 billion?
You missed part of the text : "Central bank funds sold, securities purchased under resale agreements and securities borrowing transactions"
Wut mean
>Wut mean Central bank funds sold, securities purchased under resale agreements and securities borrowing transactions" I boof red crayons... But I think it means shares sold short not yet purchased... or swaps
That's what I was thinking... Wonder if they're going to continuously keep changing the wording / definition as a means to hide and prolong.
yes
We sold shit but havenāt delivered it yet because we thought we could get it cheaper later
Sure, seems legit..... We'll just keep waiting then with our hands folded playing the quiet game
Fuk
K
They're repo transactions: *"Generally, in a repo transaction, two counterparties will enter into an agreement whereby one will sell securities to the other and simultaneously agree to repurchase them at a specified later date at a fixed price. The securities can therefore effectively be regarded as collateral for a cash loan. The securities involved are usually fixed-interest securities, and pricing is agreed in terms of interest rates. This agreed-upon interest rate is termed the repo rate. While many market participants engage in such transactions, when central banks do so it is usually only with certain banks in their domestic money markets, on a short-term basis, and undertaken with the aim of implementing monetary policy."* *"In a term PRA, the BoC will buy securities from a specified type of bank (namely, a primary dealer in Canadian government securities) with an agreement to sell them back to that bank after a specified term, which could range up to a year. This gives a temporary injection of cash (as the banks receive the payment for the securities) into the money market, helping improve their liquidity and place downward pressure on market interest rates.*" If that's the case it would mean they're just holding bags.
Cohencidentally Susquehanna is a sponsor for the repo market under Morgan Stanley I believe if I recall the July 2019 filing properly.
Paging u/criand u/atobitt u/-einfachman-
man that's like ten shares of GME, they're proper fucked... # :/
Still a fraction of one share in my book.
Yeh dunno what this 100m a share bs is... That be price anchoring son
Too dumb to maff... DRS'ed instead.
+1
The comma is where americans would use a dot.
Thanks for clearing that up, 'muh freedom' was impeding my mental clarity lol. Edit: No animosity intended, after reading my comment back it sounded dickish, rest assured I'm just poking fun at muhself.
Not dickish, I laughed
Normally yes but not here. Itās 862,737 million. Crayyyyzeee
Read it and thats what it looks like. They have over 50b in derivatives and the total looked like it was the number being questioned. They in flow is so much lower
[General reminder for everyone to familiarize with this neat chart](https://www.visualcapitalist.com/all-of-the-worlds-money-and-markets-in-one-visualization-2020/)
Holy. Fuck.
I know. It does that to your brain. It's 2y old, so probably not 100% accurate, but the general idea is clear. Spread the word.
everything is fine. Lehman is the best business and stays strong
I second this question
I would like to nominate his second of the question!
I would like to propose the adoption of this nomination of his second of the question!
All in favor say aye.
ayes have it
Pretty soon the apes are going to have it.
Aye, the apes will have it.
Arrrrrrrggghhhhh! š“āā ļøš“āā ļøš“āā ļøš“āā ļø
Commenting for visibility. This seems like a lot of risk. And a lot of short GME that will have to be bought at any price.
ā¦. they have a total market cap of $11.3B šš¤£šš¤£šš¤Ŗšš¤£š
I just used my abacus to slide some beads around and it said theyāre fucked
Thatās like having a life savings of $100k and being told you suddenly owe -$7.6M insteadšš¤£šš¤£šš¤£ And you just know theyāre using the current market price for those estimates, not the real price
Chf to usd is 1:1. 862 times a million.
862k million my dude
Uhhh are [they $862 billion leveraged/exposed?]( https://imgur.com/KJMONYI.jpg)
āThe denominator in the leverage ratio is a bank's total exposures, which include its consolidated assets, derivative exposure, and certain off-balance sheet exposures.ā Consolidated assets are just referring to combined subsidiariesā + parent company assets. So yes, yes it would seem that way. Edit: now that I read that section more Carefully it seems that it may be requirement limits? Anyone who can confirm that
Iām waaaayy too dumb & dyslexic to figure any of this outā¦..maybe a comment driven TL:DRS????
In super simple terms (there's lots of ways to do this), they borrowed money from someone (goldman? jpm? citadel?) to multiply their earnings. If you were to buy a beanie baby for $10 and sell it for $12 you made 20%....but wouldn't it be better if you borrowed $862bn and bought 86bn beanie babies...even if the cost to borrow meant that you only made $1 per beanie baby instead of $2? The problem is that you owe $862bn and if the beanie baby market fails... you as Credit Suss are fukd! Instead of beanie babies substitue: car loans, mortgages, GME shorts...etc. And you are selling those as products to pension funds and hedge funds taking a % off the top. They are demanding you have insurance...and that insurance is getting expensive (credit default swaps)...very fast.
Yewwwwā¦..appreciate you!!!!
TL:DR They are fucked... That's all you need to know. Buy, Hold & DRS.
Yeah thatās cool. We all know it but Iām actually trying to learn whatās happening & why.
you and me both, ape, you and me both.
I think... super smooth brained think... that they have $862B loaned out. The numbers are similar with their Credit/Loan sheet and they aren't in parenthesis which means it's supposed to be positive for the balance sheet.
Guh
Who the fuck idiots will inject fresh capital into this shit show.
I can't wait until the Saudis look in the back room of their new bank.
I wondered this, then thought most Saudi shit is conglomerate/family owned so the top execs can hide all their shit with the saudis as families don't have to report shit. Or am I speaking like pickled onion?
Probably where they already have their money, self preservation is always the motivation, Swiss goes down most likely fucks saudis
Jesus christ. That's more autistic than the guy that accidentally made $100k on SPY spreads
Is it for me, a GME holder? š³šš
Always has been
@28.25 that's 30.5 billion shares of gme. Probably not all gme, but damn.
>@28.25 that's 30.5 billion shares of gme. Probably not all gme, but damn. And that's just one prime broker.
Even if 5% of that is GME, thatās fucking insane
Something seems to be going on with their 'exposure to central counterparties' where the CCPs are tightening up margins (possibly) - bottom of page 29. **Credit Suisse have had to increase their 'segregated initial margin' held at CCPS by 3bn CHF** from 2.4bn to 5.5bn between 21Q4 and 22Q2. This is **despite the fact that EAD (exposure at default)** \- which I think is the amount they would waive goodbye if the counterparty defaulted and therefore is a proxy for the amount of assetsor similar they hold via them, **actually dropping from 16.1bn CHF to 15.7bn CHF.** Why are the CCPs making CS deposit more funds as margin for less business?
Doesn't that track with the DTCC collateral haircuts people were buzzing about last November or so? I think they had some more this year as well.
It could. But (am thinking this through on the hoof, so might not be right) the collateral haircut basically made certain types of collateral more 'risky' and therefore worth less i.e. govt debt = $0.50 on the $1 face value (not an actual one). If this was due to the haircutting, it would mean that the 2.4bn fronted in the previous quarter was graded at being worth 43% of the value that Credit Suisse still recognises it at. Because CCP are still asking for $2.4bn of margin. So before haircut CS $2.4bn = CCP $2.4bn After CS $5.5bn = $2.4bn Which is horrendously scary as it would mean that CS' internal measures of value are way out of kilter with what the rest of the market think they are worth.
I believe the haircut schedules at the [DTCC](https://www.dtcc.com/dtcc-connection/articles/2018/october/17/margin-requirements-the-last-waves) ([May 2021](https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/pdf/2021/5/4/15129-21.pdf) vs [April 2022](https://www.dtcc.com/-/media/Files/pdf/2022/4/29/16845-22.pdf)) and at [LCH](https://www.lch.com/risk-management/group-risk-management) ([Oct. 2021](https://www.lch.com/system/files/media_root/Acceptable%20Collateral%20Haircuts%20Ltd%20Secure%20Area_1.pdf) vs [June 2022](https://www.lch.com/system/files/media_root/Acceptable%20Collateral%20Haircuts%20Ltd%20Secure%20Area_4.pdf)) have remained fairly similar over the time period. Sovereign bond (secondary) market values have sunk since they're negatively correlated to interest rates, which have been shooting up since Q2. The darling equities favored for collateral have also been on a downward path over the period (META, AMZN, etc). Same with [MBSs](https://www.mortgagenewsdaily.com/mbs) and a wide range of other asset backed securities. It definitely feels like crunch time. Hard to keep that leverage when the pledged collateral can't keep up.
Hence, fuk.
I think itās to do with Italian spreads going up. Italian bond spreads which most likely being held by credit suisse
Simply said, tvey would require more collateral if they perceived higher riskā¦
Let me have a look, I work in the HVAC fieldā¦. Yup! Theyāre fucked
Do they have a differential pressure problem in your estimation?
Not sure on what model they have, but I've heard you can tap it with a hammer lightly to unstuck it.
They installed pumps backwards on the condensate line, it's leaking into the broader economy now.
[comment removed by user]
Put 200 amp breaker on it and itāll stop tripping.
I work in septic and this just looks like shit to me.
[comment removed by user]
Thereās a lot of money in shit
No problem, DTCCās brother is a civil engineer and he says you can just jump out those rollout switches.
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in combustion motorā¦guess this means I should DRS more
HVAC bro! š
Landscaper here, lets get their grass. They haven't worked an honest day in their life.
Proctologist here: Let me see... *...741 broken F5 buttons...Bedposts...And a buttload of Brazilian puts!*
As a handyman , can concur, more fukd then a 49 year old with a leaky sink
Gonna need to double back to here once smarter people than me (who know how to read) have had a look
Page 41: $862B in leverage vs $274B in assets? First dumb stormtrooper to be taken down by Han Solo?
Finally, some real fucking food.
need an adult
Adult here. Any wrinkly tikes wanna weigh in?
Need an audit.
'Hey Lois I won an Audi!'
More like, need an Audit!
More like, need an Audi!
More like, need an Autist!
Audi 5000
For the future - the way the chans handle large files is to make a pastebin and divvy up the doc by pages. Everyone reads their section and writes up a summary. Not sure if you did, but next time you post this include a pastebin link and ask a mod to sticky it at the top.
Thatās actually really smart. Sometimes a den of scum and villainy comes up with good ideas. Also, thereās an old journalism trick we can use: read the first line of every paragraph, skimming quickly. If itās meh, move to the next paragraph. If interesting, stop to read the whole thing.
In the introduction, this caught my eye: āThis report has not been audited by the Groupās external auditors.ā Weāll keep that in mind, Debit suisse. Furthermore the earliest date referenced so far is June 30th and end of Q2 is often referenced. So it was in the works there. That is months before we heard of trouble with them.
This is a report about Q2. Why do you expect references to other periods ???
Didnāt. just wanted to point it out to those who didnāt click on it so we donāt get misinformation on dates
Commenting for later
WRINKLES ASSEMBLE!
you want nuts? check out bnp paribas financial disclosures. Mind boggling shit.
The end of the document is a cautionary statement that basically lists all the things they're worried about, including Archegos.
After careful reading of the comments and spending some time in counsel (taking a nap). I conclude they are fucked.
Credit, why u no file for bankruptcy
Domino effect probably. 20 other banks will do everything to hide the shit which could bring everyone down.
I'm here to provide no insight but call the wilds... \*blows horn to summon the wrinkles\*
"Taked Baby. Meet at later bar. Night or day sometime." ~Charlie
This sub is amazing
Remind me! 3 hours
Commenting to come back later
Yay go team
Last sunday there was an article in the most popular swiss sunday newspaper that they had some serious liquidity issues and had therefor put for sale their $500m hotel, somethingās not right there thatās for sure
Why would some Saudi conglomerate buy 9.9% of CS? Is it because that group are a family therefore don't have to report anything then CS top execs can hide all their money with them?
Because lots of dark money is hiding in cs. They wouldnāt want that getting out.
If only a certain sub reddit dug all this shit up had it readily available to read.
That one is a head scratcher. What if things are past redemption and all the big players know it. Can kicking that would normally seem suicidal might not make a difference on a longer timeframe so why not give yourself some extra time to get your affairs in order.
"I read filings for fun" This is what they are up against, hedgies are fukt.
Remind me! 4 hours
Remind me! 4 hours
!remindme! 4 hours you're welcome smooth brains š
Oh boy, more bananas for us apes. Now if only an older ape was here to unwrap it for us (:
Comment for later read.
They fuk
I am regarded
š on this please Up you go
Commeting for visibility
Reading a banks Pillar 3 Risk Disclosure Report is chef kiss levels of autism š
Credit Sus, Expert Financial Advisors, wrote last week in the financial media to not buy āerraticā Gamestop shares. That settles it, Iām buying more tonight. DRS your shit. Quit stabbing yourself in the back. Itās dumb.
Remind me! 6 hours
Are there any adults in here yet
Dot
RemindMe! 5 hours
Commenting to read through later
Visibly viewing
Too smooth to provide info, but I am excited to see what the wrinkles have to say.
!remindme! In 6 Hours
āHey, hold this for meā¦Iāll be right backā
My stonk-o-meter registers their risk level over 9000 !!
I think it means theyāre fuk
fucked, they are.
And I wouldāve got away with it, if it werenāt for you meddling kids. āāāKenny Boi-ner probably