This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This page has archives. Sections older than 100 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
There seem like the same problem, only as a question of degree, and could probably be the same article. A lot of the material in this article is already talking about a "squeeze" not a "crunch". -- Kendrick7talk 20:37, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
This article should be on it's own and not merged with anything. It has become a highly popular term used by newspapers, politicians and the public and as of such, should have its own article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.41.190.81 (talk) 10:56, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Some people call it the squeeze (how you feeling the squeeze? we are all feeling the squeeze.) Credit crunch credit crunch cruch crunch crunch. Now my ears are crunched. Rant over, sometimes it's called the squeeze, but I hear credit crunch being used most of the time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.75.123.194 (talk) 23:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
"The results from applying the framework show that the region is suffering from an overall credit crunch, although the situation differs considerably across the countries in question. In Korea and Malaysia, where banks adjusted their rates more rapidly to rising money market rates, the wedge between lending rates and risk-free asset yields has significantly widened, indicating an increasing strain on credit supply by banks through the price mechanism. In the other countries, the credit squeeze has been rendered more through quantity rationing than through increases in lending rates. Furthermore, in all countries for which relevant detailed data were readily available showed unequivocal evidence of a flight to quality: banks shifting towards less risky assets (e.g. government securities); depositors turning to those banks perceived to be more secure (i.e., foreign banks, large banks, and state owned banks). All in all, this evolution appears to pose serious threats particularly to the financing of small and medium sized enterprises, and to sectors most affected by informational asymmetries" p. 4-5
"Furthermore, when the credit crunch ensues, there may be an additional channel negatively affecting SMEs in terms of availability and cost of external finance, that is flight to quality (safety) by depositors. Envisaging increased fragility of the intermediaries, depositors may shift their savings towards institutions that are perceived to be less likely to go bankrupt. For instance, foreign banks could be deemed safer than domestic ones; smaller banks may be viewed less likely to be bailed out by the government; and private banks are less likely than state-owned banks to be covered by government guarantees. Thus, an additional credit squeeze may hit those customers borrowing from smaller banks, private banks, or domestic banks which are suffering from the deposit flight, and typically SMEs depend more than other firms on small, private and domestic banks’ lending. The institutions which receive new flows of funds often have no established relationship with the borrowers of those institutions losing resources, and are thus less likely to make loans to those customers." p.12
These lists are obviously non-exhaustive, and only what I've come up with in a quick search.
Explicit statements that "credit squeeze" and "credit crunch" are used interchangeably: World Bank paper and Businessdictionary.com.
Examples of the terms used interchangeably: Bloomberg, Business Week, BBC (also, their "credit crunch jargon list" does not include "squeeze"), IHT, Boston Globe, MSNBC[1], Gardian, Washington Times, CBS, New York Times, etc ad naseum.
Blog entry complaining that there is no differentiation. Raboplus.com.au (?) blurb showing slight ambiguity. The Economist glossary has a definition for "credit crunch", but no entry containing the word squeeze.
A completely different use of the term "credit squeeze" appears at investorwords.com (though this non-RS source has no definition for "credit crunch").
Can someone provide evidence to out weigh this? NJGW (talk) 04:40, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I've done the merge, which reflects consensus (after excluding banned user RPRP and apparent socks).JQ (talk) 11:01, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
Could someone please edit the EL to remove the reference to "2008". It's not going to be relevant in the new year and the crunch is still alive and kicking. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.87.15.130 (talk) 08:13, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
I have removed the below unreferenced as I am not convinced about its relevance
Lucian Sunday (talk) 01:08, 1 January 2009 (UTC)
There has been a lot of odd behavior at this article recently, including the use of misleading edit summaries and repeated use of socks to avoid a block. Would each person who has recently edited the article please identify themselves and what their reasoning is here (especially those who might have a wp:COI in editing against eachother). To the editor who has been removing whole sentences recently (in all your manifestations), you have been reverted by three people in the past 48 hours... you're going to have to build some consensus here. NJGW (talk) 08:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
I would say the original author has not covered what is a complex subject with precision or accuracy. The banks screwed up I hope wiki doesn't! No wonder many academics view wiki with great skepticism... "A credit crunch (also known as a credit squeeze or credit crisis) is a sudden reduction in the general availability of loans (or credit) or a sudden tightening of the conditions required to obtain a loan from the banks". Wrong actually the credit crunch started slowly in 2006 with increased interest rates, and defaults on mortgages rising so that banks were finding it difficult to pay back loans. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.167.22 (talk • contribs)
I would say the original author has not covered what is a complex subject with precision or accuracy, it is also very muddled and not easy to follow. No wonder many academics view wiki with great skepticism... "A credit crunch (also known as a credit squeeze or credit crisis) is a sudden reduction in the general availability of loans (or credit) or a sudden tightening of the conditions required to obtain a loan from the banks". This is not totally true and is only one narrow definition. I’m also not sure where this reference came from? I will edit the main document when I have the time. One definition is: An economic condition in which investment capital is difficult to obtain. Banks and investors become wary of lending funds to corporations, which drives up the price of debt products for borrowers.
The use of the word “sudden” by the author is absolutely inaccurate. Actually the Credit Crunch started slowly in 2006 with increased interest rates for home owners which led to defaults on mortgages rising far more than banks had calculated for. This meant banks would receive less payments from mortgage holders and in turn the banks found it more difficult to pay back their own loans that they had taken out to purchase the mortgage debt in the first place. (Banks borrowed money so they could purchase mortgage debt from brokers). If anyone wants a really good description of how the credit crunch developed, I would recommend www.johnabbey.co.uk Many thanks! Peter —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.43.167.22 (talk • contribs)
You should be more respectful of other people's views. Economics is not an exact science which is why we are where we are today! I looked at Abbey's site it's really quite good. Suggestt you do the same. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.102.236.146 (talk) 08:04, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
Sad that there is vandalism on this page, but I can't remove it, because the page is supposed to be in semi-protected status..., well that is working out really well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anarchman (talk • contribs) 03:43, 23 February 2009