h*n
2 楼
http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/treasury-sandp-w
In short:
"About 3:15 p.m., Treasury officials called S&P to alert them of the error.They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar with the call. S&P said it would look into it.
(也就是说人家根本没考虑可能通过的deal，都忘了通过的deal了)
Two hours later, S&P called Treasury to acknowledge the mistake but told
officials that the downgrade would still occur. Treasury asked S&P to take more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision."
(忽略了deal不是个问题，本来就是要给downgrade的，计算错误不算什么。)
In long:
The Obama administration had just finished a fight with House and Senate
Republicans when it prepared to battle a small group of credit-rating
analysts based in New York, London and Toronto.
Standard & Poor‘s had warned for months that it might downgrade the U.S.
credit rating if leaders couldn’t find a way to reduce the growing national
debt by $4 trillion over 10 years.
When the deal reached Tuesday fell short of those expectations, the Treasury
Department and S&P engaged in a furious set of exchanges that ultimately
led to a downgrade Friday night. Since then, the Obama administration and S&
P have been engaged in a war of words over the circumstances of the agency’
s decision.
“I really do think the only major outcome and the only major downgrade in
this context is to S&P’s credibility. It displayed a shocking level of
incompetence,” a senior administration official said Saturday.
David Beers, the head of S&P’s sovereign rating unit, disagreed.
“This agreement will not produce a stabilization of the government’s debt
burden on its own, and we don’t have a lot of confidence that another
agreement is going to follow this one,” he said.
Friday’s hectic events began at 1:15 p.m. when an S&P analyst called
Treasury to say a downgrade would come after the stock market closed,
according to people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of
anonymity to discuss it freely. The analyst sent a draft copy of the
downgrade report.
Treasury officials reviewed the report and after about 30 minutes found an
error. S&P had used a dated formula to determine how fast domestic spending
would increase over the decade. The formula did not account for last week’s
budget deal, which will slow spending.
As a result, the report said the debt in 2021 would reach $22.1 trillion,
which would be equal to 93 percent of the size of the economy. In reality,
the debt is projected to reach $20.1 trillion, or 85 percent of the size of
the economy.
About 3:15 p.m., Treasury officials called S&P to alert them of the error.
They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar with
the call. S&P said it would look into it.
Two hours later, S&P called Treasury to acknowledge the mistake but told
officials that the downgrade would still occur. Treasury asked S&P to take
more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision.
The officials argued that S&P analysts did not recognize that Washington was
taking steps to tame the national debt despite the political theater of
recent months. S&P analysts took the opposite view — that all the partisan
wrangling made it far less likely that leaders would be able to do what’s
necessary.
Beers convened a group of analysts to vote on whether to proceed with the
downgrade. They voted to do so.
At 7:15, S&P called again to say it would downgrade.
The new downgrade report emphasized political analysis compared with the
original report, according to a version of the first report reviewed by The
Washington Post.
It announced the unprecedented decision at 8:30 p.m.
In short:
"About 3:15 p.m., Treasury officials called S&P to alert them of the error.They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar with the call. S&P said it would look into it.
(也就是说人家根本没考虑可能通过的deal，都忘了通过的deal了)
Two hours later, S&P called Treasury to acknowledge the mistake but told
officials that the downgrade would still occur. Treasury asked S&P to take more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision."
(忽略了deal不是个问题，本来就是要给downgrade的，计算错误不算什么。)
In long:
The Obama administration had just finished a fight with House and Senate
Republicans when it prepared to battle a small group of credit-rating
analysts based in New York, London and Toronto.
Standard & Poor‘s had warned for months that it might downgrade the U.S.
credit rating if leaders couldn’t find a way to reduce the growing national
debt by $4 trillion over 10 years.
When the deal reached Tuesday fell short of those expectations, the Treasury
Department and S&P engaged in a furious set of exchanges that ultimately
led to a downgrade Friday night. Since then, the Obama administration and S&
P have been engaged in a war of words over the circumstances of the agency’
s decision.
“I really do think the only major outcome and the only major downgrade in
this context is to S&P’s credibility. It displayed a shocking level of
incompetence,” a senior administration official said Saturday.
David Beers, the head of S&P’s sovereign rating unit, disagreed.
“This agreement will not produce a stabilization of the government’s debt
burden on its own, and we don’t have a lot of confidence that another
agreement is going to follow this one,” he said.
Friday’s hectic events began at 1:15 p.m. when an S&P analyst called
Treasury to say a downgrade would come after the stock market closed,
according to people familiar with the matter, who spoke on condition of
anonymity to discuss it freely. The analyst sent a draft copy of the
downgrade report.
Treasury officials reviewed the report and after about 30 minutes found an
error. S&P had used a dated formula to determine how fast domestic spending
would increase over the decade. The formula did not account for last week’s
budget deal, which will slow spending.
As a result, the report said the debt in 2021 would reach $22.1 trillion,
which would be equal to 93 percent of the size of the economy. In reality,
the debt is projected to reach $20.1 trillion, or 85 percent of the size of
the economy.
About 3:15 p.m., Treasury officials called S&P to alert them of the error.
They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar with
the call. S&P said it would look into it.
Two hours later, S&P called Treasury to acknowledge the mistake but told
officials that the downgrade would still occur. Treasury asked S&P to take
more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision.
The officials argued that S&P analysts did not recognize that Washington was
taking steps to tame the national debt despite the political theater of
recent months. S&P analysts took the opposite view — that all the partisan
wrangling made it far less likely that leaders would be able to do what’s
necessary.
Beers convened a group of analysts to vote on whether to proceed with the
downgrade. They voted to do so.
At 7:15, S&P called again to say it would downgrade.
The new downgrade report emphasized political analysis compared with the
original report, according to a version of the first report reviewed by The
Washington Post.
It announced the unprecedented decision at 8:30 p.m.
e*n
3 楼
等呗，等到活人
t*s
4 楼
interestng.........
Beers convened a group of analysts to vote on whether to proceed with the
downgrade. They voted to do so.
.They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar
with the call. S&P said it would look into it.
more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision."
【在 h****n 的大作中提到】
: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/treasury-sandp-w
: In short:
: "About 3:15 p.m., Treasury officials called S&P to alert them of the error.They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar with the call. S&P said it would look into it.
: (也就是说人家根本没考虑可能通过的deal，都忘了通过的deal了)
: Two hours later, S&P called Treasury to acknowledge the mistake but told
: officials that the downgrade would still occur. Treasury asked S&P to take more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision."
: (忽略了deal不是个问题，本来就是要给downgrade的，计算错误不算什么。)
: In long:
: The Obama administration had just finished a fight with House and Senate
: Republicans when it prepared to battle a small group of credit-rating
Beers convened a group of analysts to vote on whether to proceed with the
downgrade. They voted to do so.
.They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar
with the call. S&P said it would look into it.
more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision."
【在 h****n 的大作中提到】
: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/treasury-sandp-w
: In short:
: "About 3:15 p.m., Treasury officials called S&P to alert them of the error.They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar with the call. S&P said it would look into it.
: (也就是说人家根本没考虑可能通过的deal，都忘了通过的deal了)
: Two hours later, S&P called Treasury to acknowledge the mistake but told
: officials that the downgrade would still occur. Treasury asked S&P to take more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision."
: (忽略了deal不是个问题，本来就是要给downgrade的，计算错误不算什么。)
: In long:
: The Obama administration had just finished a fight with House and Senate
: Republicans when it prepared to battle a small group of credit-rating
c*2
5 楼
打通后按1
p*s
6 楼
interesting在那里？评级是否改变从来都是一组分析师投票讨论决定，这稀奇在哪里？
级别从来不是一些固定的数字、比例决定的，如果你做过评级就知道，债务低、利润好
的公司级别反而不如债务高、盈利差的公司的情况多了去了。信用评级没那么简单，不
是说看看几年的财务报表就可以决定了的，数字最多起40%的作用。
【在 t*******s 的大作中提到】
: interestng.........
: Beers convened a group of analysts to vote on whether to proceed with the
: downgrade. They voted to do so.
:
: .They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar
: with the call. S&P said it would look into it.
: more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision."
级别从来不是一些固定的数字、比例决定的，如果你做过评级就知道，债务低、利润好
的公司级别反而不如债务高、盈利差的公司的情况多了去了。信用评级没那么简单，不
是说看看几年的财务报表就可以决定了的，数字最多起40%的作用。
【在 t*******s 的大作中提到】
: interestng.........
: Beers convened a group of analysts to vote on whether to proceed with the
: downgrade. They voted to do so.
:
: .They heard “stunned silence,” according to sources officials familiar
: with the call. S&P said it would look into it.
: more time and wait until Monday to make a final decision."
t*s
7 楼
see below
里？
Good to learn
Another thing learned
信用评级没那么简单，不
Could you share what the rest 60% rely on?
【在 p*******s 的大作中提到】
: interesting在那里？评级是否改变从来都是一组分析师投票讨论决定，这稀奇在哪里？
: 级别从来不是一些固定的数字、比例决定的，如果你做过评级就知道，债务低、利润好
: 的公司级别反而不如债务高、盈利差的公司的情况多了去了。信用评级没那么简单，不
: 是说看看几年的财务报表就可以决定了的，数字最多起40%的作用。
里？
Good to learn
Another thing learned
信用评级没那么简单，不
Could you share what the rest 60% rely on?
【在 p*******s 的大作中提到】
: interesting在那里？评级是否改变从来都是一组分析师投票讨论决定，这稀奇在哪里？
: 级别从来不是一些固定的数字、比例决定的，如果你做过评级就知道，债务低、利润好
: 的公司级别反而不如债务高、盈利差的公司的情况多了去了。信用评级没那么简单，不
: 是说看看几年的财务报表就可以决定了的，数字最多起40%的作用。
p*s
8 楼
我不是专家，但我对这行至少知道个一二，不是理科生动不动满嘴开火车，拍闹到看所
谓所以“本质的”，在他们看来，美国做什么都是个阴谋。
对一个公司或者国家的评级主要看两样，一是还债能力，而是还债意愿。第一自然就是
看债务情况，盈利状况，不必多说，第二条就要多看非数字的因素。比如北朝鲜假如发
外债的话，他数字看起来再好，也不可能给他AA以上的级别。
除了财务状况，评级有一点最重要的就是fundamental analysis。看的就是公司的总体
实力、是否有别人没有的优势，内部管理历史如何，corporate governance，这些都是
质的，不是量（财务上）的。举个简单的例子，中国石化的盈利情况其实不好，利润率
很低，而不少房地产上市公司可能从财务看肥得流油，表面上看后者比前者财务强多了
，但是中石化我可以轻而易举给AA/AA+，但房地产公司能得AA-应该就是最好的情况了
。原因就是石油是战略性物资，而且有着中央政府的背景，房地产再好，它改变不了是
周期性行业的本质，他这几年赚钱再多也不能掩盖其固有的行业风险。作为分析师，看
的是中期内这个公司的风险，这里面包括本公司无法控制的经济波动、政策影响等等，
不是看看去年的财务报表，把债务比例什么的跟固定的级别对照一下就可以的了，不然
所有人都可以做评级师了。
国家主权评级我没做过，但我完全理解S&P的动机 （不要听那些自作聪明的理科博士生
的“作秀论”“阴谋论"，都是拍脑袋的理论），抛开其负债不谈，美国政府在这次危
机里体现出来的是它处理危机的能力和效率，两党在处理到关键问题的时候相互扯皮为
了各自政治目的把国家利益抛在一边，这是S&P看到的，也是它不能保证不会再次出现
的，这就好比看到一个公司的管理层因为私人恩怨总是不顾公司的利益相互争斗。当然
其日益上升的债务和不负责人的庞大开支也是重要因素之一。
至于那个什么多少亿的error,对其级别来说基本毫无影响，只有不懂的人才拿着它大做
文章。
【在 t*******s 的大作中提到】
: see below
:
: 里？
: Good to learn
: Another thing learned
: 信用评级没那么简单，不
: Could you share what the rest 60% rely on?
谓所以“本质的”，在他们看来，美国做什么都是个阴谋。
对一个公司或者国家的评级主要看两样，一是还债能力，而是还债意愿。第一自然就是
看债务情况，盈利状况，不必多说，第二条就要多看非数字的因素。比如北朝鲜假如发
外债的话，他数字看起来再好，也不可能给他AA以上的级别。
除了财务状况，评级有一点最重要的就是fundamental analysis。看的就是公司的总体
实力、是否有别人没有的优势，内部管理历史如何，corporate governance，这些都是
质的，不是量（财务上）的。举个简单的例子，中国石化的盈利情况其实不好，利润率
很低，而不少房地产上市公司可能从财务看肥得流油，表面上看后者比前者财务强多了
，但是中石化我可以轻而易举给AA/AA+，但房地产公司能得AA-应该就是最好的情况了
。原因就是石油是战略性物资，而且有着中央政府的背景，房地产再好，它改变不了是
周期性行业的本质，他这几年赚钱再多也不能掩盖其固有的行业风险。作为分析师，看
的是中期内这个公司的风险，这里面包括本公司无法控制的经济波动、政策影响等等，
不是看看去年的财务报表，把债务比例什么的跟固定的级别对照一下就可以的了，不然
所有人都可以做评级师了。
国家主权评级我没做过，但我完全理解S&P的动机 （不要听那些自作聪明的理科博士生
的“作秀论”“阴谋论"，都是拍脑袋的理论），抛开其负债不谈，美国政府在这次危
机里体现出来的是它处理危机的能力和效率，两党在处理到关键问题的时候相互扯皮为
了各自政治目的把国家利益抛在一边，这是S&P看到的，也是它不能保证不会再次出现
的，这就好比看到一个公司的管理层因为私人恩怨总是不顾公司的利益相互争斗。当然
其日益上升的债务和不负责人的庞大开支也是重要因素之一。
至于那个什么多少亿的error,对其级别来说基本毫无影响，只有不懂的人才拿着它大做
文章。
【在 t*******s 的大作中提到】
: see below
:
: 里？
: Good to learn
: Another thing learned
: 信用评级没那么简单，不
: Could you share what the rest 60% rely on?
l*g
9 楼
抛开你夹杂的理科文科的私货，和轻佻沾沾自喜的文风不谈
内容我是基本完全同意的
很多东西其实就是common sense
有一定的逻辑思维能力就能看清楚
关键还是屁股，如果屁股太重而且坐的位置不合适，就容易影响判断
巴菲特这次跳出来说的一些话让人chuckle, 感觉是屁股决定嘴巴了
而另一个大腕El-Erian，说的话至少比较common sense:
Mohamed El-Erian, the chief executive officer of Newport Beach, California-
based Pacific Investment Management Co., said that the downgrade will spur
uncertainty in the market.
“It will fuel uncertainties about the functioning over time of the world
economy as there are no other pure AAA’s able and willing to materially
complement or replace the role of the U.S. at the core of the global
financial system,” El-Erian wrote in an e-mailed response to questions.
【在 p*******s 的大作中提到】
: 我不是专家，但我对这行至少知道个一二，不是理科生动不动满嘴开火车，拍闹到看所
: 谓所以“本质的”，在他们看来，美国做什么都是个阴谋。
: 对一个公司或者国家的评级主要看两样，一是还债能力，而是还债意愿。第一自然就是
: 看债务情况，盈利状况，不必多说，第二条就要多看非数字的因素。比如北朝鲜假如发
: 外债的话，他数字看起来再好，也不可能给他AA以上的级别。
: 除了财务状况，评级有一点最重要的就是fundamental analysis。看的就是公司的总体
: 实力、是否有别人没有的优势，内部管理历史如何，corporate governance，这些都是
: 质的，不是量（财务上）的。举个简单的例子，中国石化的盈利情况其实不好，利润率
: 很低，而不少房地产上市公司可能从财务看肥得流油，表面上看后者比前者财务强多了
: ，但是中石化我可以轻而易举给AA/AA+，但房地产公司能得AA-应该就是最好的情况了
内容我是基本完全同意的
很多东西其实就是common sense
有一定的逻辑思维能力就能看清楚
关键还是屁股，如果屁股太重而且坐的位置不合适，就容易影响判断
巴菲特这次跳出来说的一些话让人chuckle, 感觉是屁股决定嘴巴了
而另一个大腕El-Erian，说的话至少比较common sense:
Mohamed El-Erian, the chief executive officer of Newport Beach, California-
based Pacific Investment Management Co., said that the downgrade will spur
uncertainty in the market.
“It will fuel uncertainties about the functioning over time of the world
economy as there are no other pure AAA’s able and willing to materially
complement or replace the role of the U.S. at the core of the global
financial system,” El-Erian wrote in an e-mailed response to questions.
【在 p*******s 的大作中提到】
: 我不是专家，但我对这行至少知道个一二，不是理科生动不动满嘴开火车，拍闹到看所
: 谓所以“本质的”，在他们看来，美国做什么都是个阴谋。
: 对一个公司或者国家的评级主要看两样，一是还债能力，而是还债意愿。第一自然就是
: 看债务情况，盈利状况，不必多说，第二条就要多看非数字的因素。比如北朝鲜假如发
: 外债的话，他数字看起来再好，也不可能给他AA以上的级别。
: 除了财务状况，评级有一点最重要的就是fundamental analysis。看的就是公司的总体
: 实力、是否有别人没有的优势，内部管理历史如何，corporate governance，这些都是
: 质的，不是量（财务上）的。举个简单的例子，中国石化的盈利情况其实不好，利润率
: 很低，而不少房地产上市公司可能从财务看肥得流油，表面上看后者比前者财务强多了
: ，但是中石化我可以轻而易举给AA/AA+，但房地产公司能得AA-应该就是最好的情况了
相关阅读