Text/HTML
Text/HTML
If you are a registered user please log in to see more postings.
 

The AAO Weblog covers accounting issues and current events as they relate the practice of investment analysis.

 
 
Oct 24

Written by: Jack Ciesielski
10/24/2005 6:44 AM 

So far, the meltdown of Refco has been taken in stride by the markets. That's a half-empty, half-full glass: half-empty, market participants are just plain apathetic and more absorbed with the earnings reporting season. Half-full, market participants are ignoring Refco's woes because the firm's problems are self-contained and limited to its shareholders and creditors.

Not to be congenitally pessimistic, but it's the half-full view that's troubling. Refco's unregulated Capital Markets unit is part of the firm's bankruptcy filing; it's that part of the firm that deals with hedge funds and institutional investors. According to The Wall Street Journal, that unit's bankruptcy filing showed assets and liabilities nearly equaling each other - but that's based on book values and not the fire-sale asset prices of assets the firm will encounter during its proceedings. Creditors are likely to scrap over a much-diminished pie.

It's not clear yet how much derivatives exposure firms may have to Refco or how much custom-tailored derivatives business was executed by the bankrupt Capital Markets group. There could yet be some ripples throughout the financial system. If publicly-traded companies were relying on Refco for performance on derivatives they've used for hedging purposes, there could be some "broken" hedges that need to be reported in the fourth quarter. Keep your fingers crossed - so far, no firms have disclosed such events. Another possibility: hedge funds could have derivatives transactions with Refco Capital Markets as counterparty, and again, non-performance by Refco could have a negative second-order effect on them.

There should never be a reason to panic -but that doesn't mean complacency is always warranted. The next few months might still reveal some Refco fallout in ways not yet contemplated by the market's big thinkers.

Tags:
 

Pension & Other Benefit Plans: A Look Ahead


    Investors in firms with defined benefit pension plans always face the risk of suddenly being pushed farther back in line when it comes to being served their returns. Variability in plan assets and variability in benefit plan obligations are the reason: poor asset returns coupled with sinking interest rates always spell tough times for defined benefit plan funding. In that regard, this year’s asset returns combined with the Fed’s “Operation Twist” add up to “Operation Agony” for defined benefit pension plans. If trends continue along their current path, firms that may have anticipated moving to more realistic pension accounting - like Honeywell, AT&T and Verizon already have done - might forego that decision. It could be just too painful. 

    Pensions aren’t the only kind of benefit plan affected by Operation Twist. Other postemployment benefit (OPEB) plans share much the same accounting model as pensions, including the calculation of a projected benefit obligation that similarly incorporates a discount rate - one that will also be affected by Operation Twist. The net OPEB obligations were slightly less than pension obligations at the end of 2010, but also promise to grow in 2011. Investors perceive them as less threatening than pension obligations because they don’t require funding. Strangely, there are a number of firms that are recognizing income from these benefit plans - without ever creating a dime of cash for investors.

A recent edition of The Analyst’s Accounting Observer dissects these issues, and is available only to paid subscribers. A condensed version is available for free upon request. To receive it, send an e-mail to Brenda Rappold at brappold@accountingobserver.com, with “PENSIONS” in the subject line.

For information about subscribing to The Analyst’s Accounting Observer, click here.