Great graphic

[IndependentlyPoor]

The NYT has a great graphic up showing how the big banks' market capitalization has changed.

How the Giants of Finance Shrunk, Then Grew, Under the Financial Crisis - Interactive - NYTimes.com

May require registration, but it is free.

 

[Independent]

Neat graphic. Really shows the rollercoaster.

 

[Gone4Good]

They're still not small enough.

Break them up!

 

[Independent]

They're still not small enough.

Break them up!

I can support that. The graphic really makes the relative sizes clear.

 

[Lsbcal]

Nice graphic IP. Reminds me of my portfolio when I clicked the play button.

 

[Gone4Good]

I can support that. The graphic really makes the relative sizes clear.

The graphic only shows equity value. The problem is the size of the balance sheet. Citigroup, for example, still has $1.85 TRILLION in assets, down from a peak of $2.1T.

If $2.1T is "too big to fail" so is $1.85T.

Too big to fail = too big period.

 

[IndependentlyPoor]

The graphic only shows equity value. The problem is the size of the balance sheet. Citigroup, for example, still has $1.85 TRILLION in assets, down from a peak of $2.1T.

If $2.1T is "too big to fail" so is $1.85T.

Too big to fail = too big period.

Agreed.

The elephant in the room is that untold billions on those balance sheets are recorded at fantasy valuations. Who knows what those balance sheets would look like if they were really required to mark everything to market. As a result, nobody knows what the banks are really worth, and that uncertainty distorts the markets and increases the probability of panics.

 

[Independent]

The graphic only shows equity value. The problem is the size of the balance sheet. Citigroup, for example, still has $1.85 TRILLION in assets, down from a peak of $2.1T.

If $2.1T is "too big to fail" so is $1.85T.

Too big to fail = too big period.

You're correct, the balance sheet says more about TBTF than the capitalized value.