• 03 Jul 2012 at 9:58 AM
  • Barclays

Maybe Bob Diamond Manipulated Libor For Queen And Country?

When you run a bank and things get tough one thing you might do is say “things aren’t tough, they’re great!” This is always sort of a lie, with a wide range around how much of a lie it is, but it can also be self-fulfilling. A bank is basically a big pile of stuff built on a thin foundation of confidence, so if you convincingly say “things are great” then the confidence thickens and things are great.* If you go on CNBC and say “honestly, we have no idea how we’ll make it through the week,” you won’t.

There is a small deep hole here because most of the time when you need to go on CNBC and say “things are great, we have enough liquidity to last us until 2045,” you are lying in some sense, because if everyone pulls their repos etc. etc. then you actually have enough liquidity to last you until 4:45, and if you don’t convince everyone of the former then the latter happens. And if you tell everyone a thing that rapidly turns out to be wildly inaccurate, you look … well, “bad” is one word, “guilty of securities fraud” is another four. One component of the wage premium paid to bank CEOs is probably for this small deep hole risk, though so far the hole is smaller than it is deep.

I don’t know if that has anything to do with Bob Diamond. After spending several years overseeing an operation that on a near-daily basis manipulated interest rates, and that was then caught red-handed sending dozens of emails about it, he sort of had to resign didn’t he?** It’s unclear what Diamond knew when – and it’s hard to care that much; another part of the comp premium for bank CEOs really ought to be that if it turns out you were supervising a massive criminal enterprise, even unawares, you gotta go – but there’s some evidence he had an inkling. Here is DealBook:

In the fall of 2008, Paul Tucker, deputy governor of the Bank of England, spoke with Mr. Diamond about the high Libor submissions, according to one of the people close to the case. The conversation prompted Mr. Diamond to relay the central bank’s concerns to his top deputies.

While Mr. Diamond never specifically told anyone to influence Libor, at least one of the deputies acted on the discussion, regulatory records show. After talking with Mr. Diamond, the deputy then instructed employees that the Libor submissions should be lowered to be “within the pack.”

This makes a creepy kind of sense doesn’t it? The bulk of the hilariously horrible emails about Barclays’ Libor-fixing are of the form of rates-derivatives trader emails Libor submitter to say “do me a favor bro” and the submitter does him a favor and then they all high-five and chest-bump and stuff. That sort of bro-y interpersonal favor-trading doesn’t sound like the sort of thing that senior executives would be involved in.***

But creating the impression that Britain’s solvent-est bank was as solvent as everyone else on the Libor panel does seem like the sort of thing that might preoccupy its CEO, and its regulator.**** And much flak is in fact now being caught by Paul Tucker for maybe saying that, though:

The FSA report judged that “no instruction for Barclays to lower its Libor submissions was given during this telephone conversation”. The DoJ report says that even though more junior staff believed the BoE had instructed Barclays to lower their Libor submissions, “that was not the understanding of the senior Barclays individual [Diamond] who had the call with the Bank of England official [Tucker]”.

I guess? It’s fun to imaginatively reconstruct this conversation, and hard to have much confidence in your reconstruction. I submit, though, that it would be weird for junior staff to “believe the BoE had instructed Barclays to lower their Libor submissions” if the BoE had said “whatever you do, make sure your Libor submissions are accurate.” It would be somewhat less weird if the BoE had said “huh, sure is a shame that your Libor submissions are so high, might make people lose confidence in you, obviously you don’t want to submit anything wrong but, well, anyway, something to think about, nice chatting with you, later.” (Update: this is somewhere in the middle, no?)

One thing to think about is: how much would you fault Tucker, and Diamond, if that reconstruction turned out to be more or less true? Lowering Barclays’ Libor submissions was an oblique but potentially effective way for Barclays to say “we’re fine, the market will fund us, no problems here,” and while it had no direct effect – Barclays couldn’t borrow at the rate it submitted just because it said it could – it may have had some indirect effect of lulling markets into believing that Britain’s banks were in good shape. Which in October of 2008 had some value to Barclays and, probably, to the BoE. Maybe it even helped Barclays make it through the crisis relatively unscathed but for the whole, y’know, massive interest rate fraud thing.

My own guess is that Barclays wouldn’t be such a piñata if that was all it had done: if it had lied about Libor just to boost confidence in itself, with perhaps a nudge-and-wink assist from the BoE, there might well be a shrug of “well everyone kind of knew that.” (Certainly the BoE did; Mervyn King went around saying that Libor was “the rate of interest at which big banks don’t lend to each other,” which I’m sure he regrets a bit now.) Propping up confidence in a bank’s viability, even dishonestly, is a venial sin – as long as the bank remains viable.

The problem for Barclays was that its traders also manipulated Libor not to preserve confidence in the bank and the banking system, but to boost the P&L on their own trades. That sort of outright zero-sum fraud, documented in voluminous terrible emails, is harder for regulators and the public to tolerate. The irony is that those manipulations probably didn’t have all that much effect, relatively speaking: they were on the order of a half basis point every now and then (er, every day, whatever), and more crucially Barclays’ traders at least thought they were shooting against other banks manipulating Libor the other way. So the net effect on rates may have been small. Whereas in the depths of the financial crisis, Barclays was pushing down its submissions to be “in the middle of the pack” at the same time that other banks had incentives to do the same, and probably did. “Everybody’s doing it” then made the problem worse, not better – though it might also have made it easier to forgive.

Barclays CEO Robert Diamond Resigns [WSJ]
Barclays Executives Are Said to Know of Low Rates [DealBook]
Diamond testimony crucial for BoE deputy [FT]
Will Diamond Bob bring others down with him? [FT Westminster]

* Some have expressed skepticism about your ability to do that, for a generic you. Also consider whether manipulating Libor is a way around Bagehot’s dictum: if banging on about how creditworthy you are is self-defeating, quietly saying “look how much credit we’re getting and at such good terms” may be the only option left.

** Exercise for the reader: how many other bank CEOs will fall into that category? How many will resign? This guy perhaps conflates “Barclays” and “Bob Diamond” too much but he is not entirely wrong:

Barclays “has not been well served or rewarded for its co-operation with the regulators,” said Ian Gordon, an analyst at Investec Securities in London.

But don’t act so surprised, Ian; first place is often problematic when it comes to regulatory investigations. See e.g. Goldman’s priority in time and size in Abacus-style-CDO fines.

*** Though it’s also the sort of thing that, if I were a bank CEO, I would assume existed unless proven otherwise by actually impermeable Chinese walls, enforced compliance policies, etc. Bro-y interpersonal favor-trading is the natural state of traders; if the particular favors that they’re trading are illegal, you have to actually stop them doing it, not just look shocked when you find out they did.

**** Also BoE does monetary policy and I stick by my theory that 2008-era Libor manipulation was a form of unofficial monetary easing that central banks might not have been all that broken up over.

51 comments (hidden to protect delicate sensibilities)
Show all comments ↓

Comments (51)

  1. Posted by Im_a_Dude | July 3, 2012 at 10:13 AM

    Matt at 10am?
    Bess must have called him in the middle of the night to rouse him from slumber to get working on this.

  2. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 10:14 AM

    Nice tags

  3. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 10:14 AM

    Thank goodness we have all those non-manipulated rates like Prime to fall back on.

  4. Posted by Honest Gas Trader | July 3, 2012 at 10:15 AM

    Thank God there has never been any cheating on important financial markers like monthly natural gas index prices.

  5. Posted by Captain Obvious, CFA | July 3, 2012 at 10:16 AM

    My memory of October 2008 was that exactly nobody was "lull[ed] into believing" that any banks in the Western world were "in good shape."

  6. Posted by guest | July 3, 2012 at 10:18 AM

    We would like to present you with this UBS 150 watch to commemorate your time with us.

  7. Posted by Retired Trader | July 3, 2012 at 10:27 AM

    Quit hiring "smart" people if you want all this cheating to go away. When everyone is an MBA, CFA charter holder or PhD trading financial derivatives then the playing field becomes too level for those expensive car, home, villa, plane, boat, mistress and gambling "payments" that come due with increasing frequency. So, cheating becomes part of the business plan of allegedly smart traders.

  8. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 10:39 AM

    Classic Bess!

  9. Posted by guest | July 3, 2012 at 10:43 AM

    I am proud to say quite honestly that I never knew what was going on at RBS

    -J, Cameron

  10. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 11:02 AM

    Couldn't understand a word. Need some graphs.

  11. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 11:04 AM

    Footnotes are the new tags

    - M. Levine

  12. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 11:06 AM

    Dear Matt,
    We notice you have been using our famed computer system in excess as of late, and we demand some sort of royalties to absolve such infringement. If an agreement cannot be reached, we will be forced to take legal action. Please refrain from using our STAR or doubleSTAR systems until further notice.
    Regards,
    The Rebellion Team*

    * – whirr, beep, buzz, boop. That is all.

  13. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 11:13 AM

    Colby Grad. Other than that I have no concerns.

  14. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 11:16 AM

    Take your meds, grandpa

  15. Posted by VonSloneker | July 3, 2012 at 11:32 AM

    No Mr. Diamond…I expect you to die.

    - Goldfinger

  16. Posted by Lowly Assistant | July 3, 2012 at 11:43 AM

    Dear Matt,

    A formal letter to cease and desist your use of "like" is currently being drafted and will be forwarded to the following address:

    611 Broadway, Suite 907D
    New York City, NY 10012

    In the interim, please refrain from abusing the phrase or referencing same.

    -Teddy W. Ullyot, FB GC
    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/business/zuck_sells_

  17. Posted by VonSloneker | July 3, 2012 at 11:46 AM

    Normally I'd take the time to ridicule a post like this. Not today…you see my package from Bonobos came in yesterday and I look so fucking smexy today that I feel one with all human-kind. Yes, even you Retired Trader…even you.

    - Guy who is booking a luxury vacation to Bali and boycotting Chivas Regal

  18. Posted by Rex Ryan, CFA | July 3, 2012 at 11:46 AM

    No concerns here.

  19. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 12:18 PM

    Someone should punch you in the face.

  20. Posted by Guy with A.D.D. | July 3, 2012 at 12:48 PM

    Bob,

    Pass my number on to my new partner for charity events and then delete it form your phone.

    Much appreciated

    -Phil Mickelson

  21. Posted by guest | July 3, 2012 at 12:54 PM

    this is the sort of hard-hitting journalism that's gonna get matt a pulitzer. or sorkin's seat on squawk box. or maybe, like, both?

  22. Posted by Matt's Nice | July 3, 2012 at 1:11 PM

    Probly gonna, like, get ARS in trubs talking like that.

  23. Posted by B Iteme | July 3, 2012 at 1:20 PM

    Yes, Matt should be in the running for the Pull-It-Surprise. More importantly, can we get some photos of Dirty Bobby D. without his toupee?

  24. Posted by Here's Johnny | July 3, 2012 at 1:43 PM

    I guess we know who is cleaning the toilets later this year at bethpage

    -Tiger

  25. Posted by Walter Sobchak | July 3, 2012 at 2:07 PM

    Love on the Rocks, aint no big suprise.

  26. Posted by Guest | July 3, 2012 at 4:41 PM

    Based on that eagle logo, Bob's looking like maybe he did it for Fuhrer and Fatherland, not for Queen and Country.

    Realize that I'm far from the first person to make that connection, and I'm kind of surprised that Barclays hasn't ditched the eagle completely – http://dealbreaker.com/2007/06/barclays-eagle-on-

  27. Posted by The 1% | July 3, 2012 at 11:10 PM

    He still looks he has no penis

  28. Posted by DSK | July 4, 2012 at 5:11 AM

    I have to admit I have manipulated a member of the 'team' while thinking of the Queen (in maid uniform) more than once.

  29. Posted by Name | July 4, 2012 at 9:51 AM

    Fiddle the LIBOR

  30. Posted by comment | July 4, 2012 at 10:30 AM

    He's an American. If he did it for queen and country he's also a traitor.

  31. Posted by Steven .k | July 4, 2012 at 2:10 PM

    <img src="http://www.mobilediscount.info/ikea/sso.jpg"/&gt; it's funny but i couldn't imagine he manipulated for Queen and Country.<img src="http://www.mobilediscount.info/xbox/xss.jpg"/&gt;

  32. Posted by vitamin | August 24, 2012 at 12:04 AM

    Hi there, just became aware of your blog through Google, and found that it is very informative. I will appreciate if you continue this in future. A lot of people will be benefited from your writing. Cheers!

  33. Posted by Demirsoy | August 25, 2012 at 11:48 AM

    Thank you for the confidence in cloud based acconntiug. We experience very often that people are reluctant to move the books to the cloud. And the security issues? Well, I think that the threat of pouring hot coffee over the office/home computer is still bigger than attacks on or failure of data mirrored several times on different physical locations I work for E-conomic Ltd., we have never been an install package software but we sure see how internet access to the clients’ books is a DREAM for accountants. It redefines acconntiug both for accountants but most significantly for small businesses.

  34. Posted by ktalgcaamfd | August 26, 2012 at 8:57 AM

    oDKQUX gatsawwsaqkq

  35. Posted by gbaoefsl | August 27, 2012 at 7:59 PM

    Vwf8CH qlfrxdvngiel

  36. Posted by gbdyfyuonxv | August 28, 2012 at 5:56 AM

    qlcIL2 , [url=http://jqhdpesmbbbv.com/]jqhdpesmbbbv[/url], [link=http://gahjerljfvos.com/]gahjerljfvos[/link], http://zsgqlythagdv.com/

  37. Posted by crork | September 10, 2012 at 9:05 PM

    ayhuLL Great blog article. Much obliged.

  38. Posted by crork | September 11, 2012 at 4:05 PM

    Kcwn4X Im thankful for the blog article.Much thanks again. Much obliged.

  39. Posted by Mascot Hire Grimsby | September 17, 2012 at 8:37 PM

    Hey there from overseas! This is just what I was thinking of, and you wrote it well. Thank you

  40. Posted by rentals | September 18, 2012 at 1:14 PM

    Not what I was looking for but great anyway! Well done!

  41. Posted by bedrijf verhuizen amsterdam | September 18, 2012 at 3:31 PM

    Hello there, just became alerted to your blog through Google, and found that it’s truly informative. I will be grateful if you continue this in future. Many people will be benefited from your writing. Cheers!

  42. Posted by Ray Monroig | September 19, 2012 at 1:29 AM

    Many thanks for featuring Gravity Eric. If anyone has suggestions or needs help getting started off let me know. Drop me an email anytime.

  43. Posted by Micaela Petron | September 19, 2012 at 12:08 PM

    I really like you KIM!

  44. Posted by ultra violet treatement | September 21, 2012 at 12:08 PM

    I like your useful words. excellent information. I hope you release more. I will carry on watching

  45. Posted by traducir en ingles a español | September 28, 2012 at 1:10 AM

    Not what I was thinking but wonderful anyway! Well done!

  46. Posted by black hat seo | October 1, 2012 at 11:51 PM

    Thank you a lot for sharing this with all people you really know what you’re talking about! Bookmarked. Kindly also consult with my web site =). We will have a link change agreement among us!
    black hat seo http://www.gscraper.com/
    black hat seo

  47. Posted by love this | October 2, 2012 at 1:03 PM

    sup I’m jenny I’m such a silly girl but I still really appreciated your writing

  48. Posted by wow gold | October 6, 2012 at 12:13 PM

    Great post. I was checking continuously this blog and I’m impressed! Extremely helpful info particularly the last part :) I care for such info much. I was looking for this certain info for a long time. Thank you and good luck.

  49. Posted by roller skates | October 9, 2012 at 10:14 PM

    I came here hunting something else, but this enthused me regardless. Enthusing stuff!

  50. Posted by Dannie Whitacre | October 13, 2012 at 7:41 PM

    I just couldn’t leave your web site before suggesting that I actually loved the standard information a person provide on your guests? Is going to be back incessantly to check out new posts.

  51. Posted by darlene nelson qqqq | October 14, 2012 at 7:12 AM

    In 2011, it was covered by The Gamits on a split with Red City Radio.