How to Deleverage Balance Sheets
Bouncing around trading desks:
Credit Suisse is using a novel approach to deleverage its balance sheet…using its illiquid assets to pay bonuses; using leverage loans and CMBS to pay compensation packages for MDs and directors. The securities will be places in a fund called Partner Asset Facility and employees will be given stakes in the facilities. Bonuses will be the first loss piece if prices fall further. The bank will boost potential returns by providing leverage to the facility. Assets will be held on balance sheet and employees will be paid semi annual coupons at L+250bps. The facility will be in place for 8 years.
>>
UPDATE: December 18, 2008 4:26pm
I assumed this was a goof — until someone sent me a link to this — its real!
Credit Suisse Group AG’s investment bank has found a new way to reduce the risk of losses from about $5 billion of its most illiquid loans and bonds: using them to pay employees’ year-end bonuses.
The bank will use leveraged loans and commercial mortgage- backed debt, some of the securities blamed for generating the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, to fund executive compensation packages, people familiar with the matter said. The new policy applies only to managing directors and directors, the two most senior ranks at the Zurich-based company, according to a memo sent to employees today.
“While the solution we have come up with may not be ideal for everyone, we believe it strikes the appropriate balance among the interests of our employees, shareholders and regulators and helps position us well for 2009,” Chief Executive Officer Brady Dougan and Paul Calello, CEO of the investment bank, said in the memo.
The securities will be placed into a so-called Partner Asset Facility, and affected employees at the bank, Switzerland’s second biggest, will be given stakes in the facility as part of their pay. Bonuses will take the first hit should the securities decline further in value.
“It’s monstrously clever,” said Dirk Hoffman-Becking, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein Ltd. in London who has a “market perform” rating on Credit Suisse stock. “From a shareholders’ perspective it’s great because you’ve got rid of some of the assets and regulators will be pleased because you’ve organized a risk transfer.”
Monstrously clever indeed.
Source:
Credit Suisse to Use Illiquid Assets to Pay Bonuses
Christine Harper
Bloomberg, Dec. 18 2008
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=auEEfFRNdqcs&
December 18th, 2008 at 2:12 pm
This package could be a bit like Swiss cheese… full of holes and melts rather easily when things get hot.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
This is just another way to get compensated for something that is not deserved.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Probably more window dressing. Corporate America’s favorite dressing……..
December 18th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Priceless!
Members of congress could be paid by the profits made from the lending of taxpayer money to AIG and GM and Chrysler, etc. from the TARP “loans”..I think this idea has legs…!!
Since we know that the taxpayer is not going to lose money…what could be safer? Moody’s would rate this idea…AAA!
December 18th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
That is hysterical, Bruce, but a fantastic idea. It is clearly an idea that needs to be promoted. After all, a report read by Liesman today on Corporate Infomerical-NBC said that the taxpayer is “already making money” off of the TARP program.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
I know how to do it best. You combine assets of a challenged nature with end of year executive compensation. The assets become the compensation.
If employees gripe that the assets they worked so hard to create are worth about the same as second hand bathroom tissue, then they will also be admitting that their hard work was for naught and they don’t deserve bonuses. If not, they will accept their hard earned bonus assets at ‘fair value’ based on ‘future discounted cash flows’ and pay appropriate taxes on them.
Of course, that won’t happen because, as one sage I can’t remember the name of said “Wall street is really one big compensation scheme”. The crooks always win. Madoff will die peacefully in his sleep of old age before he goes to jail. Anyone who goes beyond Investments 101, or simple futures, or basic derivatives such as currency swaps, is also walking around with a ‘kick me then steal my wallet’ sign on their back’s.
BTW, don’t you love the NYMEX today. It is about $38 while Brent was about $44 this morning. Some hedge fund loser is getting murdered on the Nymex. I bet he thought he was a lot smarter than everyone else. Now he’s just a lot poorer.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
I’m all in oil and hoping for Fed support of commodities at these levels.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
I’m sorry not to be one of the “financial elite”, or even the “cognoscenti”, and I’m somewhat baffled usually by sarcasm – but the core of this idea appears to have some merit – on face value at least. It has the feeling of “common sense”.
Could someone expand on the “two hands” of this concept and put some flesh on the bones?
December 18th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
John Borchers Said
December 18th, 2008 at 2:35 pm
I’m all in oil and hoping for Fed support of commodities at these levels.
reply:
———————
I’m hoping they support, as in cheer on, prices at these levels or below. Thank you for supporting the liquidity function of commodity futures investors. You are a world patriot.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:44 pm
I can afford to lose it if I’m wrong. This is not an all-in life savings play. Just an extra money play. If it seems like it’s the end of the world (oil chart / commodities look it right now) it’s prolly a very good play.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
The only thing that makes me mad about this idea is that I didn’t think of it first. This is really brilliant IMO. This is a freaking genius idea. Every firm should do this. Get the crap off the books. Give the crap to the people who bot the crap. The only other idea that would be even better would be to “claw back” bonuses paid to executives using the fraudulent conveyances laws…and then give them shares of the crappy assets they bought.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
John Borchers,
My guess is that NYMEX oil will return to about $45 in a few days. As I suggested earlier, someone on the NYMEX is being taken to school and being made to push a penny with their nose on the floor. Things will clear up next week. Jan is about $38 and Feb is around $43.
December 18th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
The gov’ts will begin the buy futures contracts to prevent deflation. It will be a joint effort. I just don’t know when.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
John Borchers said:
December 18th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
The gov’ts will begin the buy futures contracts to prevent deflation. It will be a joint effort. I just don’t know when.
Lecture:
——————————-
Not all falling prices are deflation, although the rapid reduction of priced that were recently and rapidly inflated because of shenanigans with commodity and home pricing certainly looks like deflation. We’re just on the other side of the peak and normalizing.
If the government wants to help, they should put some smart people in a room and, essentially, do a little root cause analysis about credit and lending, and how it affects normal everyday life at the consumer level. No ivory tower economists allowed, please. Then, they should send credit to the trenches as opposed to continuing with a sick manifestation of trickle down economics that uses TARP money instead of tax rates.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
I checked Alum and Copper. 0.6 and 1.2 are reasonable pricing. I picked oil because the market looks to oil for a feel on the economy more than the others.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
brilliant – It’s the Colin Powell-Pottery Barn rule for busted bank compensation…
December 18th, 2008 at 3:12 pm
Beautifully structured. It has a sense of poetic justice to it, and yet it makes sense too. A win-win.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Jorn Borchers,
Copper at 1.2 is approaching the cost of production. I saw some copper mining high muckity muck on TV about a year ago and he was beaming. Copper was maybe $3 and he bragged his costs were about $1. By inference, Saudi oil has an average cost of about $2 per barrel according to a Saudi oil minister on 60 minutes a few weeks ago. The question of the day is “Will the cost of oil from tar sand recovery set the price?” Or will the Saudi’s cost be closer to the ultimate final NYMEX price ?
December 18th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
I think it’s brilliant with one caveat – no loopholes.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Bogwad:
This is not a real item…it is a sarcasm directed at the TARP, toward one of the banks that got into trouble…it is a restatement of the TARP toward the bank, and if you were an employee …how would you feel? If your Partner Asset Facility (great name) were to lose money…well, that is exactly what is in store for the taxpayer.
We here are not the financial elite, just trying not to lose our shirts, and more worried daily that the Fed and Treasury may not “succeed”…as for me, I am thinking still, this is not a liquidity problem, it is a worldwide deleveraging…therefore these measures might not work as well as the academics hope…
If it is a real item….well…
December 18th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Editorial in WSJ suggesting change in tax code to encourage deleveraging.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122956350701216841.html
Following is the key point:
“…restore, temporarily, the option for companies to deleverage by retiring debt at a discount without incurring tax liability. Tax-code and regulatory changes in the 1980s limited this option by treating the difference between the original issue price of debt and the lower amount for which it’s repurchased as taxable income. The resulting tax liability on this “phantom income” decreases liquidity and blocks necessary restructuring of distressed corporate balance sheets. It also creates a perverse preference for bankruptcy …”
December 18th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
This would be a great idea if they use Bonus-to-model payouts. Simply pay the bonuses with the MBS that is trading at $0.20 and tell the receiver it is worth $0.95 and he is paid in full.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:32 pm
dead hobo:
Remember, all those “cost of production” figures change with the overall inflationary/deflationary picture. That’s why these things are a ’spiral.’ We’re in a deflationary spiral right now. The cost of new production is getting cheaper and cheaper by the day. Several months ago, the costs of new production was very high because the components needed to find the stuff were all screaming: steel, shipping, power, people…
The exact reverse is true at this point….
There’s no such thing as “set” cost of production…it’s constantly changing. Also, keep in mind that the market can, and has in the past, traded WELL below the actual cost of new production. Right now, we’re seeking out the price points for marginal wells to be shut in….I think the canadian tar sands are the highest cost stuff that needs to get shut first. All these old wells that were revived in the last few years are now getting shut in.
I think we’re getting close to a bottom in oil. Some people talking $25 bucks, but I see $30-35 as support. HOWEVER, the problem is the extreme Contango. If you go out and buy the Feb or March contracts, you have to pay so much premium to prompts, you risk the market “rolling” down on you. Deep contango like this can be vicious cycle, similar to shorting backwardated markets.
The USO fund is going to be just bleeding value non stop at this point…constantly rolling length in a hugely contangoed market…ugh.
December 18th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Ten year bond now 2.07%…I do hope that sob Bernanke has as much concern directed at him when he is 75 as he is giving the retired in the good ole USA here. I understand why he is doing what he is doing, but the elderly here are being trampled and their fixed instruments are generating nothing. I usually make pretty risible comments, but this trampling on this segment of society makes me madder than hell. These people don’t deserve what is happening to them here. AIG yes, granny no…I am steamed.
December 18th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
Bruce @ 3:41
The Fed generally has minimal influence on the 10 year Treasury note yield.
If Bernanke were to raise the Fed funds rate, there’s an argument to be made that the 10 year note yield would not increase, and might even decline further.
(Of all my economic concerns, the low yield on the 10 year note is pretty much at the bottom of the list).
December 18th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
DL…I do agree with some of that…that rates here would probably not rise even if Bernanke were not as aggressive. But I guess the dog food makers should make money here with all the new “pups” we are manufacturing….
December 18th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Keep in mind that the Fed has only “threatened” to buy the long bond – so far the only monetization that has occured has been in agency paper.
December 18th, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Bruce @ 3:41
Also, elderly people on fixed income can, in principle, reap some of the benefits of deflation.
December 18th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Now DL…easssssy with that….
SS payments…stagnant…(neutral)
sales taxes…rates rising
property taxes…states trying to raise them..
food costs…have gone up, and look to stay up…
medical care costs…medicare deductibles going up…
In truth…with no way to increase income…they are in a bind..
December 18th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Credit Suisse to Use Illiquid Assets to Pay Bonuses (Update1)
Christine Harper
Dec. 18 (Bloomberg)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=auEEfFRNdqcs&
Credit Suisse Group AG’s investment bank has found a new way to reduce the risk of losses from about $5 billion of its most illiquid loans and bonds: using them to pay employees’ year-end bonuses.
The bank will use leveraged loans and commercial mortgage- backed debt, some of the securities blamed for generating the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, to fund executive compensation packages, people familiar with the matter said. The new policy applies only to managing directors and directors, the two most senior ranks at the Zurich-based company, according to a memo sent to employees today.
“While the solution we have come up with may not be ideal for everyone, we believe it strikes the appropriate balance among the interests of our employees, shareholders and regulators and helps position us well for 2009,” Chief Executive Officer Brady Dougan and Paul Calello, CEO of the investment bank, said in the memo.
The securities will be placed into a so-called Partner Asset Facility, and affected employees at the bank, Switzerland’s second biggest, will be given stakes in the facility as part of their pay. Bonuses will take the first hit should the securities decline further in value.
“It’s monstrously clever,” said Dirk Hoffman-Becking, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein Ltd. in London who has a “market perform” rating on Credit Suisse stock. “From a shareholders’ perspective it’s great because you’ve got rid of some of the assets and regulators will be pleased because you’ve organized a risk transfer.”
‘Better Than Nothing’
For employees, “there’s some upside in there and if the alternative is nothing, it’s a lot better than nothing,” Hoffman-Becking said.
Credit Suisse said earlier this month it would eliminate 5,300 jobs and cancel bonuses for top executives after it had about 3 billion Swiss francs ($2.8 billion) of losses in October and November. Unlike larger Swiss rival UBS AG, Credit Suisse hasn’t received a government rescue. Banks and securities firms are struggling to pay employee bonuses after taking more than $800 billion of losses on mortgages and corporate loans.
Writedowns on leveraged finance commitments at Credit Suisse have amounted to 3.5 billion francs since the beginning of the crisis, while the bank marked down its commercial mortgage holdings by 2.9 billion francs.
Outside Investors
Credit Suisse is the first to use the debt to pay employees. Outside investors may also be permitted to invest in the facility, according to the people familiar with the matter, who declined to be identified because the plan hasn’t been made public. The bank will boost the potential for returns by providing leverage to the facility, and will be paid back first, according to the people.
Leveraged-loan commitments on Credit Suisse’s books fell to between 2.5 billion Swiss francs and 3 billion francs by the end of November from 11.9 billion francs at the end of September, Dougan said on a conference call on Dec. 4. He said the bank had also “somewhat reduced” its commercial real estate positions. Credit Suisse had 12.8 billion francs in commercial mortgages at the end of September.
Assets in the facility will remain on Credit Suisse’s balance sheet and will be held in the company’s fund management division, the people familiar with the plan said. The new structure will mean that any mark-to-market losses or gains on the assets will be offset by identical gains, or losses, on the bank’s liability to employees.
Coupon Payments
Employees will receive semi-annual coupon payments on their investment in the Partner Asset Facility at the London Interbank Offered Rate plus 2.50 percentage points. The ultimate value of the facility will be determined over the next eight years as the loans and securities mature or default, the people said.
“Cash payments representing distributions of a portion of the award may be made to participants in the future contingent on the performance of the underlying assets,” Dougan and Calello said in the memo. “Cash distributions will not be made for several years.”
The bank said it expects to begin annual payments after five years.
While Credit Suisse doesn’t say how many managing directors and directors work at the investment bank, the number is in the thousands.
Credit Suisse said it will also change the cash portion of bonuses for all of the bank’s managing directors and for directors in the investment bank. Under the new system, the bank will have the right to recoup some of the cash bonus in the two years after it’s paid if an employee resigns.
To contact the reporter on this story: Christine Harper in New York at charper@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: December 18, 2008 11:34 EST
December 18th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
Barry,
My bad…I simply figured this was another construct by some trader somewhere poking fun….I guess I just don’t think like these guys…
I don’t think I’d have the cojones to suggest this type of arrangement to my employees…
December 18th, 2008 at 4:36 pm
Barry made my day! (despite the beating i took) This is pure genius and brilliant. I admit to not believing it was real, too.
December 18th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
I’ll take my bonus in perceived bad paper please.
December 18th, 2008 at 4:57 pm
I totally agree, except that the debt should be transferred as the bonus, not the assets. The anti-bonus. If they earned a positive bonus in positive times, they earned a negative one today.
December 18th, 2008 at 5:03 pm
Brilliant. Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md) will administer the Anti-Bonus Clawback Program for IB Chumps.
December 18th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
I have to go run but I will say this…I am the bank and I’ve played my hands poorly…I am worried I won’t even be able to ante up…sooooo…
I lay off 3500 and tell my remaining employees what is written above..
My thoughts would have run more to the ….I’ll lay off 7000, let them look for jobs, maybe that pay as well, but the people I keep I will make sure I pay well…not here is a steaming pile of manure…I am going to make many of you pray this turns into fertilizer next year…if not…well, your bonus isn’t really about how well you as an individual performs…its about how much manure we can turn into fertilizer…
As I said, I just don’t think like that..
December 18th, 2008 at 5:29 pm
it wasn’t thaaat long ago that we, actually, Manufactured for a living..
this idea is a beautiful throwback to those days..
during that time, it was hardly unusual that ‘bonuses’ were paid in Product..
though, in this version, Winnie has it right, with: December 18th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
This would be a great idea if they use Bonus-to-model payouts. Simply pay the bonuses with the MBS that is trading at $0.20 and tell the receiver it is worth $0.95 and he is paid in full.
that would be hewing it, ‘old school’..
“Look, Honey~, Level III *Assets!”
December 18th, 2008 at 5:32 pm
I love this idea. Should become mandatory.
Reminds me of a cow’s cud. Regurgitated – to be chewed for the second time.
December 18th, 2008 at 5:59 pm
Someday maybe we’ll consider the greenback an “illiquid asset” so we can be just like CS’ employees.
December 18th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
Brilliant.
Now that is Swiss Banking.
Give the highest 2 levels of directors a taste of their own medicine.
December 18th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
How the term Zombie Employee originated: By Bruce in Tennessee
In the 1990’s Japan underwent a deleveraging and in doing so, tried to keep too many banks for the level of commerce that resulted. At that time these banks were known as “Zombie Banks”
Fast forward to 2008…an investment bank in Europe, in trying times realized they had too many employees. So they laid off 3500. In reality, they should have laid off more, but tried to keep as many as they could so that they could function effeciently. They came up with an innovative payment plan, consisting of using a steaming pile of manure and telling employees that if they could turn the manure into valuable fertilizer by the end of the year, they would get extra money. However, these employees were often referred to by the highest level of management as Zombie Employees, just as the Japanese had done with banks in the 1990’s.
The term came into widespread use in the US in March of 2009, when Ben Bernanke agreed to be interviewed on CNBC by Rick Santelli about how low interest rates had not kept the deleveraging process from producing continuing pain in the US….Mr. Bernanke appeared for the interview wearing an old Beanie and Cecil beanie with a single propeller coming from the top. As the interview progressed, Mr. Bernanke was heard to say,” If this was a real helicopter I could drop money on everyone…wheeeeee!”
Immediately after the interview, all employees of all investment banks worldwide began to use the term Zombie Employee when refering to each other.
The term really gained widespread use in July 2009, when the employees of ChryFoGen, the old big 3, produced only 5 cars for the month of July in their plant in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Management that day told the plant employees that 2 of the 5 employees would have to be laid off, and that the other 3 just might be “zombie employees”
Barry, you are free to use the term in any future books.
December 18th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
this should be a trick, cannot figure it. no trust at all
December 18th, 2008 at 6:56 pm
Doesn’t this create even more incentive to never clean up the books?
December 18th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Disregard my previous comment if this thing is completely taken off the books.
December 18th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
I’m just trying to figure out how hard I’d work if I got such a bonus.
December 18th, 2008 at 8:49 pm
Sadly, people in this country just don’t think like this — as Bruce says (@5:08).
Instead of believing that those who get paid the big bucks should shoulder most of the risk, we shove the risk down to the bottom layers, with constant reminders that their jobs may be moving to BRIC tomorrow, and reserve the gravy for the most entrenched, secure employees — those at the top.
This is EXACTLY the reason that Americans are sliding lower and lower in the global competitive marketplace.
If a company’s best employees happen to be the best-compensated employees, WHY NOT put them in charge of dealing with the worst problems, the biggest threats to the success of the enterprise?
Instead, we are the Bailout Nation, looking for someone else to clean up the mess we made.
December 18th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
danm@7:09
Just think how hard you would work if it meant keeping the company alive that was paying your salary.
People haven’t yet figured out that depression-level unemployment means that when your job goes, you won’t necessarily be able to waltz out and get another job, no matter HOW good you are at what you do.
In a way, it’s a lot like this — you’re in a lifeboat with a dozen other people, some of which are manning the oars, and some are bailing water with their hands, as the boat leaks and is taking on water.
Do the people with the greatest ability sit idly by, or do the people with the biggest hands bail the hardest and those with the best biceps man the oars?
If people with ability are not willing to do their part to save the enterprise, they deserve to sink with it.
December 18th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
So does this mean that they now leave the securities at their current value, and pass on the adjustments straight through to this “Partner Asset Facility?” It sounds like they just completely skirted m2m reporting.
December 18th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
If they mark-to-market before giving the toxic assets as compensation, then the managers and execs should make out very well on this scheme.
December 18th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
I suppose that the line between writing off the bad debts, laying off sufficient employees to shrink the company accordingly, and the choice of trying to wring some value from a portfolio of rotten investments depends on the size of the pile.
If the pile is large enough, writing down the bad debt becomes tantamount to liquidating the company.
There is a trade-off somewhere in there when good management becomes a lot more interested in salvaging the last nuggets of value, retaining value becoming more important than writing down difficult assets. And what better way to motivate the leaders, than tying their compensation to their success in rehabilitating a bad situation?
But the point remains that in America, there is a third option — obtain a bailout and use that to pay bonuses and salaries (at least until the spotlight of publicity becomes more than you can take). Keep going back to the Fed, swapping junk for cash, for as long as you need.
There’s that quaint old “moral hazard” thing. Why should the managers take the hit, when somebody else can take it for them?
December 19th, 2008 at 12:29 am
My balance sheet was written down this year by 30%. Will the government give me some illiquid assets as a bonus? Maybe I can get access to the PPCVF… Poor, poor Citizens Viability Fund? How about a helicopter full of money? Nothing, huh?
What’s that? I have to pay taxes on my income and can only offset $3000 of capital losses against it? Guess that’s better than a sharp stick in the eye… or is it?
On the flip side, I lost my job in July, so at least I’ve got that going for me. I’m paying as much for health care as I do for rent every month. I’m pretty sure Satan will be conjuring himself in my living room to personally supervise the next act.
People call me a pessimist and then I tell them I think I’m a realist.
On a lighter note, my daughter was born in Oct 2008.
I was born in Dec 1973.
My father was born July 1929.
I’m pretty sure that makes my family tree at least resemble the Horsemen of the Economic Apocalypse. Dad, of course, was always smarter than me so I’m a little more of a lagging indicator than he was.
December 19th, 2008 at 2:09 am
I like the “zombie employee” term — nice one! We’ve had a few of those already over the years, just never knew what to call them : ).
I used to do some work at a factory in Japan way back in the good days when they had lifetime employment. There was one guy there that apparently had really screwed up, and he had a “by the window” job (Japanese term). Literally he would come to work every day and look out the window. “Don’t do that, you might end up ‘by the window’”. “Hiroshi was a rising manager, but now he’s ‘by the window’, the poor bastard”.
Man, do they get discipline or what — shunning is always more effective than yelling and violence. Around here we even have drive-by shunnings, but that is a whole other story.
December 19th, 2008 at 5:10 am
Bruce N Tennessee:
“This is not a real item…it is a sarcasm directed at the TARP, toward one of the banks…..
[....]
If it is a real item….well….”
Now that its veracity appears to have been confirmed, what’s your (sober) overall take on it?
Disclaimer: wasn’t suggesting that you had been imbibing adult beverages when you replied, what I meant was with the benefit of elapsed time ‘tween then and now, have you any additional perspectives which may not have been at the forefront of your thinking yesterday?
December 19th, 2008 at 7:50 am
Bogwad..no, I am not a trader….I am a small businessman. I think though, that employees here, if at all possible, would be better off with another firm…I think we are likely to see much more of this “creative thinking” in 2009.
December 19th, 2008 at 7:59 am
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/45c13340-cd0b-11dd-9905-000077b07658.html
Almost unheard of in previous downturns…good luck Bogwad.