|
In the run-up to the financial crisis, S&P and its chief rival, Moody's Investors Service, slapped their highest ratings on bundles of mortgages that were sold to investors as securities. The result: Investors thought it was safe to buy the bundles and poured more and more money into them, inflating the housing bubble and making the eventual collapse that much worse. The agencies have also been criticized for moving too slowly to downgrade risky companies, saddling investors with losses and the feeling they'd been duped. One reason the agencies retain such power is that mutual funds, pension funds and other big investors are restricted from holding debt rated below a certain level. That means a downgrade can trigger selling, even by people who don't believe the countries or companies are any more likely to default. S&P has taken a more aggressive stance than its two biggest competitors, Moody's and Fitch, both of which still have AAA ratings on U.S. debt and both of which have been much less vocal about Europe. Some experts say that S&P is being aggressive now because it's trying to shore up its reputation after its many missteps. "It's trying to get its mojo back," said David Kotok, CEO of money manager Cumberland Advisors. He was especially critical of the agency's decision to assess the politics behind fiscal dealmaking. "That's a foggy, fuzzy area." Jan Randolph, director of sovereign risk for IHS Global Insight, which issues ratings on sovereign debt and is a competitor of S&P, said S&P appeared to be engaging in "a certain amount of overcompensation." Raghuram Rajan, a finance professor at the University of Chicago's Booth School of Business, cautioned against reading too much into the S&P's motives. "It's not their job to fix Europe's fiscal situation," he said. "Their job is of an observer who tells the investing public what any changes mean for the credit quality of European bonds." Others say S&P's criticism reflects a conclusion reached weeks ago by financial markets, and evident in rising interest rates for European debt. "There's sort of a no-duh aspect to S&P's decision," said Guy LeBas, chief fixed income strategist at Janney Capital Markets. He said that while the timing was unusual, "it certainly gives a kick in the rear end to some of the policymakers who have been slow to act." In a conference call with reporters, S&P officials said it would be a conflict of interest to tell governments what to do. They said, however, that they may ask questions later to get details on any European debt agreement.
[Associated
Press;
Copyright 2011 The Associated
Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
News | Sports | Business | Rural Review | Teaching & Learning | Home and Family | Tourism | Obituaries
Community |
Perspectives
|
Law & Courts |
Leisure Time
|
Spiritual Life |
Health & Fitness |
Teen Scene
Calendar
|
Letters to the Editor