Who's Really Getting Bailed Out?

Recs

22

Disney Buys Marvel!

David Gardner called it. He’s up 1,334%! See what David’s recommending that you buy NEXT.

Stock Advisor

Anger over the trillions of dollars of government money that have been used to bail out the U.S. financial system is understandable since at some point U.S. taxpayers are going to have to pay that money back through higher taxes. Well, either that or the U.S. itself will declare bankruptcy -- but that's a different discussion altogether.

The particularly frustrating part about the bailouts is that if we're to believe much of the media coverage, the money is going toward keeping financial executives high on the hog and cushioning the fall of those who brought about calamity in the first place. There's certainly some truth to these claims, but most coverage has failed to call out one of the primary beneficiaries of the bailouts. Any guesses?

If you said "bondholders," then you are smarter than a fifth-grader.

The guy behind the guy
So who are these shadowy figures known only as "the bondholders?" To put it broadly, these are the companies and investment funds that own the debt of companies like Citigroup (NYSE: C), Bank of America (NYSE: BAC), JPMorgan (NYSE: JPM), and General Motors (NYSE: GM) and are hoping that these same companies can -- maybe with a little help -- stave off bankruptcy.

As for their exact identities, they're a bit harder to track down than equity holders, but I dug up the major bondholders for Citigroup and Bank of America. There's a good deal of overlap between the two, particularly at the top with PIMCO -- the bond fund behemoth -- and mutual fund giant Vanguard leading both lists. Other major holders include MetLife (NYSE: MET), AIG's (NYSE: AIG) life insurance arm, Fidelity, Prudential, Dodge & Cox, and TIAA-CREF.

Do the names sound familiar? They should, because these are the same companies selling us funds for our 401(k)s and holding our life insurance policies.  

In many cases the bonds that these heavyweights are holding are trading at discounts -- for instance, a $1,000 long-dated Bank of America bond might be trading at $0.60 on the dollar. However, the government's commitment to propping up financial institutions thus far means that debt holders are still receiving their interest payments and are theoretically on schedule to eventually recoup their principal at full value. In other words, right now while brimstone scorches the rest of the economy, they're sitting pretty.

The bonds that bind us
So if the "who" is bondholders, and the "what" is getting bailed out, then how about the "why," as in "why should we care?"

The fact that bondholders are the ones getting bailed out doesn't really tell us anything new about the bailouts. That is, all along, the government has been saying that the bailouts are designed to get credit flowing through the system again. Bondholders are the linchpins for this strategy as they provide the trillions of dollars of debt funding that many major companies rely on. If we spook the debt market, we'll end up with exactly the situation that the bailouts are designed to prevent.

This isn't to mention the fact that an earthquake in the bond market may very well flow back directly to Jane and Joe American. The funds that investors like PIMCO and TIAA-CREF are managing are for pensions, retirement accounts, and other savings plans, so bondholder losses become fund-holder losses. A big hit to the investment portfolios of insurance companies may not be as direct, but it could also create uncomfortable situations.

Containing moral hazard
But even if the reasoning behind bailing out bondholders isn't anything new, the player is one that hasn't gotten much attention -- and that seems like a big oversight. After all, if there was a video "Banks Gone Wild," bondholders would be the cheering crowd feeding the banks drinks and encouraging them to go further.

When we talk about moral hazard and the creation of firms that are "too big to fail" I think we have to look hard at the fact that the debt buyers left the funding spigot on far too long for Lehman, Citi, and everyone in between. Give the bondholders a government-funded free ride and they'll fearlessly lend to massive, risk-taking institutions all over again, expecting Uncle Sam's printing press to spring to life if anything goes wrong.

Prodding at this group won't be easy though. Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS) may be politically connected, and Citigroup might have a healthy lobbying effort, but the folks buying debt pack some punch of their own. PIMCO, for instance, not only has former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan as a consultant, it also is running the government's $251 billion commercial paper program and its $500 billion mortgage-backed security program.

Of course, the first step is bringing the bondholder issue into the light. AIG financial services employees getting million dollar bonuses may seem outrageous, but the week-plus spent pulling our hair out over that served as more of a distraction than a step toward a solution. At a time like this, you have to pick your battles, and the fate of trillions of dollars worth of corporate debt seems like a front that we should be all over.

Like this article? Get our best articles delivered direct to your inbox at no cost. Sign up for Foolwatch Weekly by entering your email below.

Fool contributor Matt Koppenheffer owns shares of Bank of America, but does not own shares of any of the other companies mentioned. The Fool's disclosure policy believes in good, old fashioned war bonds ... wait, what do you mean there's no more war bonds?

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On April 06, 2009, at 4:56 PM, bondnut wrote:

    Bondholders take a lower rate of return and are not owners of the company and have no voting rights. Bondholders are simply lending money based on the financials of the company. Without bondholders companies would go bankrupt as they would not have enough sources of funding. If Citi, BAC or Chase cut off bondholders no bank could ever issue a bond again. If CIT, GM, AIG etc. all cut off bondholders the whole financial system would be in ruin.

    Shareholders are actual owners of the company with voting rights who are gamblers betting if the company does well they will reap big rewards.

    Bondholders are savers and shareholders are investors.

    Remember, your whole life, pension, your stocks and parts of your 401K is invested in bonds. If you are paying taxes you are earning income and most likely have investments. You are cutting off your nose to spite your face is you make bondholders suffer.

  • Report this Comment On April 06, 2009, at 5:05 PM, TMFKopp wrote:

    @bondnut

    "If CIT, GM, AIG etc. all cut off bondholders the whole financial system would be in ruin."

    Of course it's the government, not the individual companies, that's now deciding what will happen to the bondholders, but your point is taken. And that is exactly why the bondholders are able to hold the system hostage. It makes them very powerful, but not necessarily right.

    Matt

  • Report this Comment On April 06, 2009, at 5:15 PM, bondnut wrote:

    Remember CIT did an attempted cram down to buy out senior bondholders at 60 cents on the dollar and it backfired. Technically, post-tender bonds should have risen as CIT improved its balance sheet, but some of its bonds kept falling even all the way to the 30's. The reason being is nobody trusted CIT anymore, who wants a bond where the company borrrows 10K from you and then says take 6K back or risk getting nothing back in bankruptcy. The GMAC thing also backfired. PIMCO and those who stood strong are getting 100 cents on a dollar. Now bondholders know who is bluffing. Ford got lucky that a lot of small retail folks who bought at 100 cents on a dollar sold in a panic between 15 and 25 cents on a dollar to vulture investors who were more than happy to tender at 30 cents on a dollar. But once again those who sold in a panic lost 85% of their money.

    Unless these companies actually declare bankruptcty bondholders are not falling for these "voluntary tenders" anymore. Plus bonds are above common and preferred shares. Companies like AIG, BAC and Citi where the US Govt pumpted in billions via pref and common shares purchases in a bankruptcy will lose it all. Lots of vulture bondholders got into AIG at 30 cents on a dollar and citi and bac at 50 cents on a dollar. They are more than happy to clip coupons and wrestle control of the company in bankruptcy or collect some of the pumped in billions from the govt in the bankruptcy settlement.

  • Report this Comment On April 09, 2009, at 5:08 PM, philis50 wrote:

    It seems to me that the only damn person on the planet that has any risk in this mess is me and every other American that will have to pay for it.

    Nice game you have wall street every screw up is a win win FOR YOU.

    Turn off the damn money flowing to these clowns.

    Let's see how well they survive on the street!!

  • Report this Comment On April 12, 2009, at 12:34 PM, CarolT100 wrote:

    I'd like to investigate this further. How does one find out who the leading bondholders are? By the way, one of Citi's directors is William S. Thompson Jr., retired CEO (1993-2009) of Pacific Investment Management Company (PIMCO).

  • Report this Comment On April 13, 2009, at 10:38 PM, CarolT100 wrote:

    Who is actually running PIMCO now? It seems that in 2000, it was acquired by Allianz AG, but the old directors continued in office until April 24, 2008, when shareholders voted them out and put new Allianz directors in. Diana L. Taylor was appointed a director afterwards, in May.

    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/908187/00011931250819...

    http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/908187/00009501230900...

    Diana L. Taylor happens to be the mistress of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Add your comment.

Compare Brokers

TD AMERITRADE
more info
ShareBuilder
more info
Power E*Trade

more info
Scottrade
more info
Fool Disclosure

DocumentId: 869272, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 11/22/2009 8:02:38 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...

The Must-Read Story on Fool.com
An Open Letter to the Federal Reserve

Related Tickers

11/20/2009 4:00 PM
BAC $16.09 Up +0.01 +0.06%
Bank of America Co… CAPS Rating: ***
GS $170.01 Down -2.82 -1.63%
Goldman Sachs Grou… CAPS Rating: ***
MET $33.90 Down -0.30 -0.88%
MetLife, Inc. CAPS Rating: **
GM $0.75 Down +0.00 +0.00%
General Motors Cor… CAPS Rating: *
AIG $35.10 Down -0.56 -1.57%
American Internati… CAPS Rating: **
JPM $42.46 Down -0.09 -0.21%
JPMorgan Chase & C… CAPS Rating: ***
C $4.20 Down -0.06 -1.41%
Citigroup, Inc. CAPS Rating: ***

Community: Investing Wiki

Term Of The Hour

Uncertainty: Uncertainty is an inability to ascertain the true current state or to determine or predict future outcomes.

Want to learn more or edit this definition?
Click here to read more!