Fed Suggests More Talking To Solve Communication Problem

I regularly lament the Fed's penchant for over-communication. Every week, market participants are compelled to process a cacophony of soundbites from a long list of policymakers ostensibly in the interest of transparency and keeping the public informed. Of course, the general public isn't listening and anyway doesn't care, which means the Fed's actually speaking to investors or, more to the point, to traders. In short: The Fed's giving gamblers an excuse to gamble -- a rationale for tweaking ("

Join institutional investors, analysts and strategists from the world's largest banks: Subscribe today for as little as $7/month

View subscription options

Or try one month for FREE with a trial plan

Already have an account? log in

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

9 thoughts on “Fed Suggests More Talking To Solve Communication Problem

  1. The most charitable interpretation I can come up w/ for Mester is that she’s trying to warn traders they’re misjudging the Fed’s intention and taking on too much risk. If that’s her intention, she should say it. Surely she doesn’t believe more Fed speak will enhance clarity about the Fed’s intentions.

    From a less charitable perspective, Fed speak is more and more amorphous b/c they are fully immersed in a game of make believe, giving traders permission to believe anything they want. YOLO, FOMO, 0DTE, etc. Perhaps at the top of the traders’ belief system is the view that in the absence of an extreme event, Powell and Co lack the backbone to do anything that will adversely impact markets b/n now and Nov.

  2. “Since I’ve become a central banker, I’ve learned to mumble with great incoherence. If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said.” Alan Greenspan

  3. Talk is cheap. If the Fed wants traders to take less risk, it should inflict the pain of excess risk upon them.

    A Fed that is less predictable, less telegraphed, more dangerous, and prone to immolate overly risky trades is a Fed that traders will fear. More fear -> less risk taking.

    How often are you truly surprised and significantly hurt by an action of the Fed? Often enough to instill fear? I’d suggest likely not.

  4. We could all save a lot of time and money if the members were all just outfitted with body cameras and mics. This Fed non-watcher is already amazed at the sheer amount of travel and anodyne speaking engagements already foisted upon the markets and populace. I’d prefer two giant steps back toward the black box.

  5. Why does the Fed think it is in control anyway? A.I. is in control . We all should know that we don’t know anything. The Fed is chatbot and it never can be outside the box, as it is the box.
    Money means everything, but the Fed”s ability to control – or even understand – its future direction is nil.

NEWSROOM crewneck & prints