![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
With the Fed raising the base rate to above that offered in the UK, my bearish position on Sterling (say, over a nine-month timeframe) is getting stronger. The long-term charts scream for a return to about $1.65:£1 (after which, as they say, all bets are off), and the interest rate position makes the dollar upside potential even greater. Bernanke either signalled "further rises to come" or "end of the cycle", depending on whose interpretation you want to believe. My guess is that he's waiting to see which way the wind blows. A seriously appreciating dollar (particularly against the Mexican peso or the loonie) would certainly be an influencing factor to stopping at 4.75%.
Meanwhile my Schwab account, which generated a grand return of 10¢ interest in a month at the bottom of the cycle, is now chopping in at about $30 plus change a month interest. It's almost making it worth my while to look at making sure I don't leave too much money around that is "wasted" in Neteller or in poker accounts.
The FT yesterday spoke of the local regulator the FSA looking at private equity, although the newspaper acknowledged that the FSA was stuck between a rock and a hard place. The UK is so attractive to foreign money (all of which keeps my house price at a ridiculous level) because, basically, it's a fairly unregulated place compared with Communist havens like the US and Europe. But it's getting to the stage where something has to be done about the increased amount of money being raised via private equity rather than public (in fact the ratio at the moment is about 33:67 in favour of public equity, so you can't say that this is the end of the day for the stockmarket investor, not just yet, anyway).
Regulate too little, and the shrewdies get away with murder. Regulate too much, and the companies are set up offshore, meaning that you have no oversight whatsoever. It's not often I feel sorry for the FSA (well, never, to be accurate), but I can appreciate their problem on this one.
The rise of private equity is in itself something of a response to overregulation. Public companies are a pain to run and it's got worse in recent years. Much easier to delist and have just a few strategic investors. I sometimes wonder whether the publicly listed and traded company is just a short-term blip in the grand scheme of capitalism. CEOs and boards could cope with it when the institutional investors (passim, the Association of British Insurers) just nodded stuff through. But now that these institutional investors have become a bit more activist, a number of boards are saying "is it worth the bother, really?"
Meanwhile my Schwab account, which generated a grand return of 10¢ interest in a month at the bottom of the cycle, is now chopping in at about $30 plus change a month interest. It's almost making it worth my while to look at making sure I don't leave too much money around that is "wasted" in Neteller or in poker accounts.
The FT yesterday spoke of the local regulator the FSA looking at private equity, although the newspaper acknowledged that the FSA was stuck between a rock and a hard place. The UK is so attractive to foreign money (all of which keeps my house price at a ridiculous level) because, basically, it's a fairly unregulated place compared with Communist havens like the US and Europe. But it's getting to the stage where something has to be done about the increased amount of money being raised via private equity rather than public (in fact the ratio at the moment is about 33:67 in favour of public equity, so you can't say that this is the end of the day for the stockmarket investor, not just yet, anyway).
Regulate too little, and the shrewdies get away with murder. Regulate too much, and the companies are set up offshore, meaning that you have no oversight whatsoever. It's not often I feel sorry for the FSA (well, never, to be accurate), but I can appreciate their problem on this one.
The rise of private equity is in itself something of a response to overregulation. Public companies are a pain to run and it's got worse in recent years. Much easier to delist and have just a few strategic investors. I sometimes wonder whether the publicly listed and traded company is just a short-term blip in the grand scheme of capitalism. CEOs and boards could cope with it when the institutional investors (passim, the Association of British Insurers) just nodded stuff through. But now that these institutional investors have become a bit more activist, a number of boards are saying "is it worth the bother, really?"
