<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Tokyo-Sao Paulo-Rio-New York-Washington &#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 23:19:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: RebelEconomist</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96115</link>
		<dc:creator>RebelEconomist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2007 01:40:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96115</guid>
		<description>Brad,

I cannot provide the answer to the question you ask, but I think it is an extremely interesting question, which merits further discussion and even investigation.  There are at least two aspects to it that I can think of:

(1) What is the best intervention strategy if you track a basket (assuming that China really does of course).  Given that China is a big economy relative to Korea, for example, its intervention might be more effective if it buys won, for example.  It depends on the price elasticity of the currency and its weight in the basket.  Perhaps this intervention is routed through the dollar, but if the dollars are quickly sold for won, then the intermediate step is irrelevant.

(2) What else are China's reserves for?  If its reserves are only for intervention against the basket, then I guess it should hold them in the basket currency composition.  If not, then it may be able to overlay some currency composition driven by investment considerations.  But perhaps they can do this using derivatives anyway.

I would be interested if you know of anything practical published on intervention strategy.  Such issues seem to fall into a crack between academics, who tend to publish useless formalisations of problems as posed by themselves, and practitioners, who are familiar with the real problem, but are not encouraged to write about such sensitive issues.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brad,</p>
<p>I cannot provide the answer to the question you ask, but I think it is an extremely interesting question, which merits further discussion and even investigation.  There are at least two aspects to it that I can think of:</p>
<p>(1) What is the best intervention strategy if you track a basket (assuming that China really does of course).  Given that China is a big economy relative to Korea, for example, its intervention might be more effective if it buys won, for example.  It depends on the price elasticity of the currency and its weight in the basket.  Perhaps this intervention is routed through the dollar, but if the dollars are quickly sold for won, then the intermediate step is irrelevant.</p>
<p>(2) What else are China&#8217;s reserves for?  If its reserves are only for intervention against the basket, then I guess it should hold them in the basket currency composition.  If not, then it may be able to overlay some currency composition driven by investment considerations.  But perhaps they can do this using derivatives anyway.</p>
<p>I would be interested if you know of anything practical published on intervention strategy.  Such issues seem to fall into a crack between academics, who tend to publish useless formalisations of problems as posed by themselves, and practitioners, who are familiar with the real problem, but are not encouraged to write about such sensitive issues.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bsetser</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96114</link>
		<dc:creator>bsetser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 14:00:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96114</guid>
		<description>right, and the one variable they control is what fraction of the dollars they buy in the market they sell for other currencies ...

my question is:

a) is this determined by a portfolio target (which implies holding more $ when the $ is falling to offset the rising $ value of euros and pounds)
b) something that the PBoC adjusts as they seek to find the best time to buy, and that means reducing $ sales when $ is under pressure.
c) something driven by a very specific rule geared around the incoming flow, not a portfolio target -- everytime we buy $10, we sell $3 for euros and pounds and yen and won.

a and b provide a bit of extra support for the $ when it is under pressure ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>right, and the one variable they control is what fraction of the dollars they buy in the market they sell for other currencies &#8230;</p>
<p>my question is:</p>
<p>a) is this determined by a portfolio target (which implies holding more $ when the $ is falling to offset the rising $ value of euros and pounds)<br />
b) something that the PBoC adjusts as they seek to find the best time to buy, and that means reducing $ sales when $ is under pressure.<br />
c) something driven by a very specific rule geared around the incoming flow, not a portfolio target &#8212; everytime we buy $10, we sell $3 for euros and pounds and yen and won.</p>
<p>a and b provide a bit of extra support for the $ when it is under pressure &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Macro Man</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96113</link>
		<dc:creator>Macro Man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 11:56:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96113</guid>
		<description>I don't think they literally want to drive it lower.  I just think they don't particularly want it stronger or more flexible, whatever they tell the baying hounds in the US Congress.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t think they literally want to drive it lower.  I just think they don&#8217;t particularly want it stronger or more flexible, whatever they tell the baying hounds in the US Congress.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bsetser</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96112</link>
		<dc:creator>bsetser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:46:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96112</guid>
		<description>re: voldemort -- true enough.  i find it hard to believe tho that the PBoC really wants a weaker RMB, yet that seems to be the result of their dollar sales ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>re: voldemort &#8212; true enough.  i find it hard to believe tho that the PBoC really wants a weaker RMB, yet that seems to be the result of their dollar sales &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Macro Man</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96111</link>
		<dc:creator>Macro Man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 10:40:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96111</guid>
		<description>Hard to say, but I think they are one of the reasons EUR/USD has rallied so much this month.  Of course, it we knew where they were and what they did at all times, they wouldn't be Voldemort, would they?  ;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hard to say, but I think they are one of the reasons EUR/USD has rallied so much this month.  Of course, it we knew where they were and what they did at all times, they wouldn&#8217;t be Voldemort, would they?  <img src='http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bsetser</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96110</link>
		<dc:creator>bsetser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 09:26:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96110</guid>
		<description>any guess as to how active?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>any guess as to how active?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Macro Man</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96109</link>
		<dc:creator>Macro Man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 08:47:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96109</guid>
		<description>Brad, I think it's fair to say that PBOC have been fairly active in selling out some of the dollars that bought in Q1.

I wonder if, had they known what reserve growth would like like over the last few years, PBOC would have substantially lowered their USD benchmark weight in their reserve basket in 2002 or so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brad, I think it&#8217;s fair to say that PBOC have been fairly active in selling out some of the dollars that bought in Q1.</p>
<p>I wonder if, had they known what reserve growth would like like over the last few years, PBOC would have substantially lowered their USD benchmark weight in their reserve basket in 2002 or so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bsetser</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96108</link>
		<dc:creator>bsetser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 08:01:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96108</guid>
		<description>Guest -- i strongly suspect you are right.   but it is worth noting that I also strongly suspect that some gulf investment funds pursue investment strategies that don't help support the GCC's $ peg.  the difference -- the GCC countries are all sovereign, and SAMA seems to have been willing to let the others free ride on its (my guess) more conservative approach.   ADIA, KIA and QIA (in this scenario) get the returns, and SAMA ends up with the dollars ...

the other point of tension that one of the PIC's mandates seems to be to invest in emerging economies -- which potentially works against the PBoC's need to add to its $ reserves disproportionately to limit pressure on the RMB/$ v other currencies (i.e. prop the $ and thus the RMB up).

If anyone thinks the PBoC has been a big seller recently, do tell -- that would force me to revise a lot of my thinking/ calculations about $ reserve growth.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Guest &#8212; i strongly suspect you are right.   but it is worth noting that I also strongly suspect that some gulf investment funds pursue investment strategies that don&#8217;t help support the GCC&#8217;s $ peg.  the difference &#8212; the GCC countries are all sovereign, and SAMA seems to have been willing to let the others free ride on its (my guess) more conservative approach.   ADIA, KIA and QIA (in this scenario) get the returns, and SAMA ends up with the dollars &#8230;</p>
<p>the other point of tension that one of the PIC&#8217;s mandates seems to be to invest in emerging economies &#8212; which potentially works against the PBoC&#8217;s need to add to its $ reserves disproportionately to limit pressure on the RMB/$ v other currencies (i.e. prop the $ and thus the RMB up).</p>
<p>If anyone thinks the PBoC has been a big seller recently, do tell &#8212; that would force me to revise a lot of my thinking/ calculations about $ reserve growth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guest</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96107</link>
		<dc:creator>Guest</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 07:01:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96107</guid>
		<description>It's difficult to believe that PIC will operate in any way that conflicts with overall PBoC reserve and FX policy - particularly given the stickiness of the central planning bias. Given that FX policy, however it develops, presumably PIC will be allowed to operate within investment parameters that are consistent with it, expanding the range of investment alternatives from what otherwise would be the case, but not independently pursuing potentially conflicting currency mix objectives. In other words, its hard to envisage a future scenario in which PIC would effectively usurp market power to the degree that it derails the PBoC's reserve and FX management control. It will likely be the implementor of PBoC policy in this regard - not a renegade formulator. And it won't be allowed to be driven by market incentives that are outside the comfort zone of PBoC.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s difficult to believe that PIC will operate in any way that conflicts with overall PBoC reserve and FX policy - particularly given the stickiness of the central planning bias. Given that FX policy, however it develops, presumably PIC will be allowed to operate within investment parameters that are consistent with it, expanding the range of investment alternatives from what otherwise would be the case, but not independently pursuing potentially conflicting currency mix objectives. In other words, its hard to envisage a future scenario in which PIC would effectively usurp market power to the degree that it derails the PBoC&#8217;s reserve and FX management control. It will likely be the implementor of PBoC policy in this regard - not a renegade formulator. And it won&#8217;t be allowed to be driven by market incentives that are outside the comfort zone of PBoC.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Macro Man</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96106</link>
		<dc:creator>Macro Man</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 06:51:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2007/04/23/tokyo-sao-paulo-rio-new-york-washington/#comment-96106</guid>
		<description>The problem for BOK is that they incur negative sterilizaton costs and are running out of share capital as a result.  But they are among the most prolific holders of yen amongst CBs, as they sell USD/JPY to prevent an extension of JPY/KRW weakness (intentional or no)- which alos explains why their sterliziation costs are negative, depsite domestic rates below US rates...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The problem for BOK is that they incur negative sterilizaton costs and are running out of share capital as a result.  But they are among the most prolific holders of yen amongst CBs, as they sell USD/JPY to prevent an extension of JPY/KRW weakness (intentional or no)- which alos explains why their sterliziation costs are negative, depsite domestic rates below US rates&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
