Finding the perfect capital structure in terms of risk and reward can ensure a company meets shareholder expectations and protects a firm in times of recession. Capital structure refers to how a business puts its money to “work”. The two forms of capital structure are equity capital and debt capital. Both have their benefits and limitations. Striking that perfect balance between the two can mean the difference between thriving versus trying to survive.
The fact that banks control 97% of the world's money supply makes them a vital institution. Banks are the engine of our modern financial system and a source for economic growth. The bank's ability to create credit can have destructive effects; the Great Depression of 1929 and the Great Recession of 2008. In both cases, banks spurred on an asset bubble through overextending credit to aid the purchase of assets. The result was an economic collapse that wiped out wealth and reduced credit creation which stalled productive investments. The lessons of the two great economic collapse support the notion proposed by the author, that bank credit for transactions that do not contribute to the economy should be restricted.
The banking industry has undergone major upheaval in recent years, largely due to the lingering recessionary environment and increased regulatory environment. Many banks have failed in the face of such tough environmental conditions. These conditions
The primary financial indicator is the roce which has shown an increases to 53.4 % in 2012 from 52.09 %. But, if the capital employed included the new £300m committed bank facility that yet drawn down at the financial reporting, then the roce show a fall to 42.07 %. The group might understate their long term liabilities.
The three types of capital mentioned in chapter 18 are, equity capital, economic capital, and regulatory capital. Equity capital, economic capital, and regulatory capital were established a capital standard for banks. Equity capital is defined as the book value of assets less the book value of liabilities. Furthermore, equity capital is also said to cushion debt and equity holders from unexpected losses. Regulatory capital includes the subordinated debt and some adjustments for off-balance sheet items. This is also different from economic capital, which is a statistical estimate of risk and capital, it also reflects the bank’s estimate of the amount of capital needed to support its risk-taking activities; it is not the amount of
“When a financial firm’s capital is low, it is difficult for that firm to perform financial services; and when capital is low in the aggregate, it is not possible for other financial firms to step in and address the breach” (Richardson, (87).
Now, the advantages of debt capital centre on its relative cost. Debt capital is usually cheaper than equity because, the pre-tax rate of interest is invariably lower than the return required by shareholders. This is due to the legal position of lenders who have a prior claim on the distribution of the company’s income and who in liquidation precede ordinary shareholders in the queue for the settlement of claims. Debt is usually secured on the firm’s assets, which can be sold to pay off lenders in the event of default, i.e. failure to pay interest and capital according to the pre-agreed schedule;
We all know from our course that leverage and liquidity risks of financial institutions are vulnerable to the crisis. The financial crisis that emerged in 2007 had many and varied causes, but one of its most
Recent studies have investigated the impact of the 2007-2009 financial crises on banks’ capital. Berger and Bouwman (2011) emphasised the importance of capital during financial crisis. Their empirical study concludes that banks with solid capital base have some benefits during the crisis than those that are poorly capitalised. Well capitalised banks are more able to withstand the shocks due to liquidity squeeze, and therefore had higher chances of surviving the crisis period. Other benefits accrued to well capitalised banks include increase in their market share and profitability, as customers withdrew their funds from less capitalised to a well-capitalised banks. This conclusion was also reinforced by a recent empirical study conducted Olivier de Bandt et al (2014) on a sample of large French banks over a period of 1993 – 2012. Similarly, Gambacorta and Marques-Ibanez (2011) demonstrate the existence of structural changes during the period of financial crisis. They conclude that banks with weaker core capital positions, greater dependence on market funding and on non-interest sources of income restricted the loan supply more strongly during the crisis period. Using a multi-country panel of banks, Demirgüç-Kunt, Detragiache and Merrouche (2010) find among others results, that during
To address this deficiency, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) proposed the post-crisis regulatory capital framework - Basel III, aimed to improve both the quantity and quality of banking organisations regulatory capital and to build additional capacity for loss absorbency into the banking system to withstand markets and economic shocks (BCBS). The importance of capital to a banking organisation cannot be overemphasised, the amount of capital held by a bank determine: (i) the level risk the bank can enter into. (ii) Loss absorbency capacity. (III) The profitability level. (iv) The cost of fund. (v) Investors' confidence, and (vi) the going - concern of the bank. It is vital that banking organisations are able to maintain a balance between their capital risk portfolios. As a result, banks tend to adjust their balance sheet components to achieve an internally set capital
In this essay I will be addressing the “Too Big To Fail” (TBTF) problem in the current banking system. I will be discussing the risks associated with this policy, and the real problems behind it. I will then examine some solutions that have been proposed to solve the “too big to fail” problem. The policy ‘too big to fail’ refers to the idea that a bank has become so large that its failure could cause a disastrous effect to the rest of the economy, and so the government will provide assistance, in the form of perhaps a bailout/oversee a merger, to prevent this from happening. This is to protect the creditors and allow the bank to continue operating. If a bank does fail then this could cause a domino effect throughout
This chapter is about the background of 2007-2008 financial crisis. The 2007-2008 financial crisis has a huge impact on US banking system and how the banks operate and how they are regulated after the financial turmoil. This financial crisis started with difficulty of rolling over asset backed commercial papers in the summer of 2007 due to uncertainty on the liquidity of mortgage backed securities and questions about the soundness of banks and non-bank financial institutes when interest rate continued to go up at a faster pace since 2004. In March 2008 the second wave of liquidity loss occurred after US government decided to bailout Bear Stearns and some commercial banks, then other financial institutions took it as a warning of financial difficulty of their peers. In the meantime banks started hoarding cash and reserve instead of lending out to fellow banks and corporations. The third wave of credit crunch which eventually brought down US financial system and spread over the globe was Lehman Brother’s bankruptcy in August 2008. Many major commercial banks in US held structured products and commercial papers of Lehman Brother, as a result, they suffered a great loss as Lehman Brother went into insolvency. This panic of bank insolvency caused loss of liquidity in both commercial paper market and inter-bank market. Still banks were reluctant to turn to US government or Federal Reserve as this kind of action might indicate delicacy of