Page 160 - untitled
P. 160

THE CDO MACHINE                                               


         lateral, structured the notes into tranches, and were responsible for selling them to
         investors. Three firms—Merrill Lynch, Goldman Sachs, and the securities arm of
         Citigroup—accounted for more than  of CDOs structured from  to .
                                                     
         Deutsche Bank and UBS were also major participants. “We had sales representa-
         tives in all those [global] locations, and their jobs were to sell structured products,”
         Nestor Dominguez, the co-head of Citigroup’s CDO desk, told the FCIC. “We spent a
         lot of effort to have people in place to educate, to pitch structured products. So, it was
         a lot of effort, about  people. And I presume our competitors did the same.” 
            The underwriters’ focus was on generating fees and structuring deals that they
         could sell. Underwriting did entail risks, however. The securities firm had to hold the
         assets, such as the BBB-rated tranches of mortgage-backed securities, during the
         ramp-up period—six to nine months when the firm was accumulating the mortgage-
         backed securities for the CDOs. Typically, during that period, the securities firm took
         the risk that the assets might lose value. “Our business was to make new issue fees,
         [and to] make sure that if the market did have a downturn, we were somehow
         hedged,” Michael Lamont, the former co-head for CDOs at Deutsche Bank, told the
              
         FCIC. Chris Ricciardi, formerly head of the CDO desk at Merrill Lynch, likewise
         told the FCIC that he did not track the performance of CDOs after underwriting
              
         them. Moreover, Lamont said it was not his job to decide whether the rating agen-
         cies’ models had the correct underlying assumptions. That “was not what we brought
                          
         to the table,” he said. In many cases, though, underwriters helped CDO managers
         select collateral, leading to potential conflicts (more on that later).
            The role of the CDO manager was to select the collateral, such as mortgage-
         backed securities, and in some cases manage the portfolio on an ongoing basis. Man-
         agers ranged from independent investment firms such as Chau’s to units of large asset
         management companies such as PIMCO and Blackrock.
            CDO managers received periodic fees based on the dollar amount of assets in the
         CDO and in some cases on performance. On a percentage basis, these may have
         looked small—sometimes measured in tenths of a percentage point—but the
         amounts were far from trivial. For CDOs that focused on the relatively senior
         tranches of mortgage-backed securities, annual manager fees tended to be in the
         range of , to a million dollars per year for a  billion dollar deal. For CDOs
         that focused on the more junior tranches, which were often smaller, fees would be
                                                       
         , to . million per year for a  million deal. As managers did more
         deals, they generated more fees without much additional cost. “You’d hear statements
         like, ‘Everybody and his uncle now wants to be a CDO manager,’” Mark Adelson,
         then a structured finance analyst at Nomura Securities and currently chief credit offi-
         cer at S&P, told the FCIC. “That was an observation voiced repeatedly at several of
         the industry conferences around those times—the enormous proliferation of CDO
         managers— . . . because it was very lucrative.” CDO managers industry-wide earned
                                            
         at least . billion in management fees between  and . 
            The role of the rating agencies was to provide basic guidelines on the collateral
         and the structure of the CDOs—that is, the sizes and returns of the various
         tranches—in close consultation with the underwriters. For many investors, the
   155   156   157   158   159   160   161   162   163   164   165