Minsky's Fragility Cycle Meets Wile E. Coyote: The Philippine Banking System’s Velocity Trap

But the boom cannot continue indefinitely. There are two alternatives. Either the banks continue the credit expansion without restriction and thus cause constantly mounting price increases and an ever-growing orgy of speculation, which, as in all other cases of unlimited inflation, ends in a “crack-up boom” and in a collapse of the money and credit system. Or the banks stop before this point is reached, voluntarily renounce further credit expansion and thus bring about the crisis. The depression follows in both instances—Ludwig von Mises 

In this issue

Minsky's Fragility Cycle Meets Wile E. Coyote: The Philippine Banking System’s Velocity Trap

I. Introduction: The Banking System’s Wile E. Coyote Moment

II. NPL Benchmarks Unveil Minskyan Fragility and the Wile E. Coyote Moment

III. Diminishing Returns: Policy Stimulus-Backstop Backlash

IV. Banks’ Drift Toward Consumers: Credit Cards and Salary Loans Power NPLs Higher

V. Stagflation Signals and the Death Knell of Benchmark-ism: Labor Frailty Meets Inflation’s Third Leg

VI. The Wile E. Coyote Dynamic in Bank Investments via Available For Sale (AFS) Assets

VII. AFS Surge and Recession-Grade Financial Losses

VIII. Benchmark-ism and the Illusion of Confidence

IX. Velocity or Collapse: The Wile E. Coyote Reckoning

X. BSP’s Tacit Pivot: From Sovereign Risk to Banking Backstop

XI. Conclusion: The Velocity Charade Meets Its Limits 

Minsky's Fragility Cycle Meets Wile E. Coyote: The Philippine Banking System’s Velocity Trap

The Wile E Coyote velocity game—credit expansion, AFS bets, and central bank lifelines—keeps Philippine banks afloat, but the stability it projects is an illusion

I. Introduction: The Banking System’s Wile E. Coyote Moment 

Inquirer.net, September 06, 2025: Bad debts held by the Philippine banking system rose to their highest level in eight months in July, as lenders—facing slimmer margins from declining interest rates—may have leaned more on riskier retail borrowers in search of yield. Latest data from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas showed that nonperforming loans (NPL), or debts overdue by at least 90 days and at risk of default, accounted for 3.40 percent of the industry’s total loan portfolio. That marked the highest share since November 2024, when the NPL ratio stood at 3.54 percent. 

Time and again, we’ve detailed the escalating challenges facing the Philippine banking system—chief among them, its role in financing the government deficit amid elevated rates. 

This has led to record levels of held-to-maturity (HTM) securities, mounting investment losses from mark-to-market exposures, and potentially unpublished credit delinquencies buried in loan accounts. 

Together, these forces have contributed to the system’s entropic liquidity conditions: a slow, grinding erosion of institutional health masked by policy choreography. 

But recent developments take the proverbial cake. While NPLs remain elevated, their apparent ‘containment’ has served as public reassurance—an illusion of stability. 

Beneath that veneer, banks have shifted into a "velocity game" to preserve KPI optics: record-high credit expansion running in tandem with record-high NPLs. 

This statistical kabuki masks growing stress but sets the system on a path to its own Wile E. Coyote moment. 

While this sustains confidence in the short term, the moment loan growth slows, the cliff edge becomes visible—and the entire charade unravels. 

II. NPL Benchmarks Unveil Minskyan Fragility and the Wile E. Coyote Moment

Figure 1

Since the second half of 2022, Philippine banks have seen a structural uptrend in gross nonperforming loans (NPLs), with nominal levels breaching all-time highs by April 2024 and reaching a record Php 535 billion in July 2025. (Figure 1, topmost chart) 

Though the industry’s NPL ratio remains at a deceptively flat at 3.4 percent, this apparent stability is largely the effect of the ‘denominator illusion’: total loan growth (+11 percent) has been fast enough to offset the rise in bad loans.  (Figure 1, middle window) 

This accelerates procyclical risk-taking—banks extend more credit, often to riskier retail borrowers, to maintain headline ratios. 

Neo-Keynesian economist Hyman Minsky famously proposed that financial instability evolves in stages—from hedge finance to speculative finance, and finally to Ponzi finance—where borrowers can no longer generate sufficient cash flows to service debt and must rely on refinancing, rollovers, or asset sales to stay afloat (see references) 

But Minsky’s framework has a counterparty: the lender. 

In the Philippine case, banks have become enablers of this drift. To keep overleveraged firms and households solvent, they must sustain ever-faster credit expansion—rolling over weak loans, extending new ones, and deferring recognition of losses. 

This is the Minskyan drift on the supply side: not just borrower pathology, but lender complicity. 

A banking system whose apparent stability depends on pyramiding credit to increasingly marginal borrowers, refinancing delinquent accounts, and chasing yield into riskier consumer segments—exacerbating the very fragility it was meant to manage. 

The result is a velocity-dependent equilibrium—one that demands constant motion to avoid collapse. 

When the sprint falters or bad debts surge, the NPL ratio will spike—mechanically, inevitably—unveiling the proverbial skeletons long buried beneath the benchmark gloss. 

The system confronts its Wile E. Coyote moment: suspended mid-air, legs still spinning, gravity imminent. Once credit growth slows, the ground disappears—and the fragility long masked by velocity is fully revealed. 

III. Diminishing Returns: Policy Stimulus-Backstop Backlash 

This Minskyan drift is unfolding despite a full-spectrum easing cycle from the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas: reserve requirement cuts, interest rate reductions, the USDPHP softpeg regime, doubled deposit insurance, and lingering regulatory relief. 

Layered atop record fiscal stimulus, these measures were designed to cushion the system—but they now reveal diminishing returns. 

The irony is sharp: instead of stabilizing credit dynamics, these policies have parlayed into rising risks—encouraging yield-chasing behavior and masking stress through refinancing. 

And to maintain the illusion of stability, authorities have upped the ante on benchmark-ism—using statistical bellwethers to project ‘resilience’ while embellishing markets to fit the narrative. 

As nominal NPLs climb and consumer credit deepens, the central bank faces an unenviable dilemma: tighten policy and risk triggering defaults, or deploy unprecedented, pandemic-style liquidity injections to preserve appearances even as the system runs out of runway. At the same time, banks themselves may be compelled to conserve liquidity and pull back on credit expansion, exposing the system’s velocity game for what it is. 

Needless to say, whether in response to BSP policy or escalating balance sheet stress, banks may begin pulling back on credit—unveiling the Wile E. Coyote moment, where velocity stalls and gravity takes hold. 

IV. Banks’ Drift Toward Consumers: Credit Cards and Salary Loans Power NPLs Higher 

This fragility is no longer confined to institutional (supply side) exposures—it’s now bleeding into the household sector. 

The banking system’s transformational pivot toward consumer credit—particularly credit card loans—has deepened latent risks, building a larger stock of eventual loan portfolio losses. 

While aggregate nominal consumer loans (including real estate) hit a record high in Q2 2025, non-performing loans also sprinted higher from their December 2022 bottom. Gross consumer NPLs now sit just 4.7% below their Q2 2021 peak. (Figure 1, lowest graph) 

Though recent increases have been broad-based, the lag in consumer credit delinquencies reflects delayed stress transmission—especially in motor vehicle and real estate segments.

Figure 2

Crucially, the share of consumer loans to banks’ total loan portfolio (net of interbank) reached an all-time high of 22.34% in Q2 2025. Year-on-year growth in consumer NPLs has accelerated from single digits in 2024 to double digits in the last two quarters. (Figure 2 topmost pane)  

As noted earlier, surging NPLs have accompanied blistering growth in credit card loans—both hitting record highs in Q2. (Figure 2, middle image) 

But it’s not just credit cards: salary loan NPLs also spiked to a record, juxtaposed against all-time high disbursements. (Figure 2, lowest graph)

Figure 3

Strikingly, even as bank lending hits new highs, consumer real estate NPLs have climbed over the past two quarters. This uptick comes despite previously stable delinquency rates—a counterintuitive anomaly given the record and near-record vacancy levels observed in Q1 and Q2 2025, potentially a product of sustained refinancing. (Figure 3, topmost diagram)  

These pressures are permeating into the demand side of the economy—further evidence of a consumer squeezed by inflation, debt, and the slow erosion of repayment capacity. 

Taken together, weak household balance sheets, rising camouflaged NPLs, and a slowing economy raise systemic risks that extend well beyond macro fundamentals—threatening institutional health and reaching deep into the financial sector’s core, even as headline growth continues to mask the underlying fragility. 

V. Stagflation Signals and the Death Knell of Benchmark-ism: Labor Frailty Meets Inflation’s Third Leg 

Credit risk pressures should intensify with the July labor market data, which unexpectedly exposes the labor market’s underlying frailty. 

The unemployment rate (5.33%) and unemployed population (2.59 million) surged to pandemic-era highs (August 2022: 5.3%, 2.681 million), while the labor participation rate fell to 60.7%—slightly above July 2023’s 60.1%. (Figure 3 middle and lowest images) 

Stunningly, despite a 1.51% YoY increase in population, the non-labor force swelled to 31.45 million, the highest level since at least 2021. 

Combined, the unemployed and non-labor force accounted for a staggering 42.5% of the 15-and-above population in July 2025—a July 2023 high. 

Ironically, authorities amusingly blamed the weather. 

For banks, a looming storm is brewing: fragile household balance sheets, concealed loan delinquencies, and a deteriorating labor market set the stage for increased NPL formation in Q3 2025, with potentially systemic consequences

Figure 4

There’s more. 

Authorities also reported that despite rice price controls and the 20-peso rollout, headline CPI jumped to 1.5% in August—exposing the likely anomalous 0.9% dip in July. More concerning is the CORE CPI breakout, rising from 2.3% to 2.7%, the highest since December 2024. (Figure 4, topmost visual) 

Historically, a negative spread—where CORE CPI exceeds headline—has signaled cyclical bottoms for headline inflation. 

History rhymes. Peak CPI in October 2018 marked the launchpad for the record run in gross NPLs, which climaxed in October 2021 before slowing. (Figure 4, second to the highest image) 

Likewise, February 2023’s peak CPI became the springboard for the recent all-time highs in gross NPLs—records now eclipsed or obscured by the Wile E. Coyote velocity game. 

The pattern is clear: Each cycle shows how households use credit to bridge spending power losses during inflation surges, only to leave borrowers delinquent in its wake. 

The fatal cocktail of surging unemployment and a potential third leg of the inflation cycle—stagflation—could be the coup de grâce for NPL benchmark-ism. The illusion of resilience may not survive the next impact. 

VI. The Wile E. Coyote Dynamic in Bank Investments via Available For Sale (AFS) Assets 

There’s another aspect we’ve barely touched—yet it has become a critical factor in the banking system’s health challenges, now showing symptoms of the Wile E. Coyote dynamic: investment assets. 

First, the distribution of bank assets reveals a transformational shift—from safeguarding liquidity to an entrenched addiction to leverage. This seismic rebalancing is evident in the rising share of investments and, more recently, the rebound in loan activity, both at the expense of cash reserves. (Figure 4, second to the lowest graph) 

Since the BSP’s historic rescue during the pandemic recession, the cash share of bank assets has plunged to an all-time low of 6.93% as of July 2025. 

Second, as we’ve repeatedly noted, the pandemic-level fiscal deficit has driven the banking system’s net claim on central government (NCoCG) to a record Php 5.547 trillion (up 7.12% last July). This is mirrored in Held-to-Maturity (HTM) assets, which rose 2.15% to a record Php 4.1 trillion. Today’s deficit is not just a macro concern—it’s manifesting as a liquidity squeeze across the banking system. And that’s before accounting for the adverse effects of crowding out. (Figure 4 lowest graph) 

Third, the very investments that carried the banking system through the pandemic—buoyed by the historic BSP cash injections—have now become a source of friction. 

The need for sustained liquidity from the BSP to keep asset prices afloat has morphed into a Trojan Horse for inflation and a fuel source for increasingly speculative risk-taking engagements. 

To stave off asset deflation, the BSP must inject liquidity—primarily via bank credit expansion—yet this comes at the cost of spiking inflation risk.

Figure 5

This dynamic is most evident in Available-for-Sale (AFS) assets, which now constitute 41% of gross financial assets, fast catching up to HTMs at 52%. (Figure 5, topmost window) 

VII. AFS Surge and Recession-Grade Financial Losses 

The record build-up of AFS assets has heightened exposure to mark-to-market shocks, transmitting valuation swings directly into capital accounts and investor sentiment. 

The impact is already visible: In Q2, Philippine banks suffered an income contraction of (-) 1.96%, driven largely by a surge in losses on financial assets totaling Php 43.782 billion—the largest since December 2020, at the height of the pandemic recession. Let it be clear, these are recession-grade losses. (Figure 5, middle chart) 

With fixed income rates falling and bond prices rallying, the source of these losses becomes clear by elimination: deteriorating equity positions and bad debt. This is reinforced by the all-time high in banks’ allowance for credit losses (ACL)—a supposed buffer against rising delinquencies that signals institutional awareness of latent stress. (Figure 5, lowest diagram) 

Yet, like NPLs, these record ACLs are statistically suppressed by spitfire loan growth.

VIII. Benchmark-ism and the Illusion of Confidence

Figure 6

Nonetheless, this structural shift helps explain the growing correlation between AFS trends and the PSE Financial Index. (Figure 6, topmost window) 

In this light, banks—alongside Other Financial Corporations (OFCs)—may well represent a Philippine version of the stock market “National Team”: pursuing benchmark-ism or, perhaps, reticently tasked with pumping member-bank share prices within the Financial Index to choreograph market confidence. 

Patterns of coordinated price actions—post-lunch ‘afternoon delight’ rallies and pre-closing pumps—can often be traced back to these actors. 

Whether by design or silent coordination, the optics are unmistakable. 

IX. Velocity or Collapse: The Wile E. Coyote Reckoning 

The implication is stark: even as banks expanded their AFS portfolios —ostensibly for liquidity and yield, they deepened their exposure to volatility and credit deterioration. 

Equity-linked losses began bleeding into financial statements, and provisioning behavior revealed a system bracing for impact. 

The liquidity strain was hiding in plain sight—concealed by statistical optics and benchmark histrionics.

Compounding this is the shadow of large corporate exposures—most notably San Miguel Corporation, whose Q2 profits were largely driven by asset transfers, shielding its Minskyan Ponzi-finance model of fragility 

For instance, if banks hold AFS equity stakes or debt instruments linked to SMC, any deterioration in valuation or repayment capacity would surface as mark-to-market losses or provisioning spikes. 

Alas, like Wile E. Coyote, banks now require another velocity game—pumping financial assets higher to sustain investment optics. 

Without it, they risk compounding their liquidity dilemma into a full-blown solvency issue.

X. BSP’s Tacit Pivot: From Sovereign Risk to Banking Backstop 

The drain in the banking system’s cash reserves appears to be accelerating. 

Following June’s 11.35% jump (+Php 224.78 billion), July posted a 12.8% contraction (–Php 281.87 billion), fully offsetting gains of June, and partly last May (+Php 66.11 billion). Nonetheless, cash and due from banks at Php 1.923 trillion fell to its lowest level since at least 2014. 

And July’s slump signifies a continuum of long-term trend. However, from the slomo erosion, the depletion appears to be intensifying. 

So, despite interim growth bounce of deposits and financial assets, net (excluding equities), the cash-due banks to deposit and liquid-assets-to-deposit ratios resume their respective waterfalls.  In July, cash to deposit ratio slipped to all-time lows, while liquid assets-to-deposit fell to pre-pandemic March 2020 lows! (Figure 6, middle chart) 

Ironically, July’s massive cash drain coincided with the implementation of CMEPA. 

Importantly, banks drew a massive Php 189 billion from the central bank’s coffers as shown by the BSP’s claims on other depository corporations (ODC). (Figure 6, lowest diagram) 

This wasn’t a routine liquidity operation—it was a balance sheet pivot, redirecting support away from direct government exposure and toward the banking sector itself. The implication is clear: the system is leaning harder on central bank liquidity to offset deepening reserve depletion.

Figure 7

By shrinking its net claims on the central government (NCoCG) while expanding its claims on ODCs, the central bank has effectively told the Treasury to park its funds at BSP, while opening its own balance sheet wider to banks. This reduces BSP’s exposure to sovereign credit, but leaves banks more dependent on central bank lifelines to cover liquidity shortfalls. (Figure 7, topmost visual)  

In practice, this means banks are now forced into a double bind. On one hand, they must absorb more government securities and expand credit to keep up the optics of balance-sheet strength. 

On the other, they rely more heavily on BSP’s injections to plug holes in cash reserves. This rebalancing masks systemic strain—liquidity looks managed on paper, but the underlying dependence on continuous velocity (credit growth, AFS positioning, and central bank drawdowns) signals fragility. 

Far more crucial, what emerges is a structural shift: the BSP’s balance sheet is less about backstopping fiscal deficits and more about propping up the banking system. Yet this is not a permanent fix—if banks stumble in their velocity game or government borrowing intensifies, the pressure could quickly return in the form of crowding-out, valuation losses, and even solvency fears. In short, the pivot may buy time, but it also deepens the Wile E. Coyote dilemma: run faster, or fall.

With the BSP pivoting towards a backstop, bank borrowing growth decelerated to 8.9% YoY or fell by 14% MoM in July to Php Php 1.58 trillion—about 17% down from the record Php 1.907 trillion last March 2025. (Figure 7, middle image) 

This deceleration underscores the limits of the velocity game: even with central bank support, banks are struggling to sustain credit expansion without exposing themselves to deeper asset and funding risks. 

XI. Conclusion: The Velocity Charade Meets Its Limits 

The deepening Wile E. Coyote dynamic—where velocity props up optics of loans and investments—is unsustainable. (Figure 7, lowest cartoon) 

Surging NPLs and rising latent loan losses belie the façade of credit expansion. 

Accelerated exposure to AFS assets injects mark-to-market volatility, while HTMs tie banks to the unsparing race of public debt. 

There is no free lunch. Policy-induced fragility is no longer theoretical—it is compounding and irreducible to benchmark-ism or statistical optics. 

The illusion of managed liquidity is cracking. Each policy lifeline buys time—but only deepens the fall if velocity fails. 

Yet banks and the political economy have locked themselves in a fatal trap:

• Deposit rebuilding is punished by state policy,
• Recapitalization is constrained by fiscal exhaustion,
• Capital markets are dominated by overleveraged elites,
•  Hedge finance is crowded out by Ponzi rollovers,
• Tax and savings reform is politically dead under “free lunch” populism 

In short: a trap within an inescapable trap. 

___

References: 

Hyman P. Minsky, The Financial Instability Hypothesis, The Jerome Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, May 1992 

Prudent Investor Newsletter Substack Archives: 

-Goldilocks Meets the Three Bad Bears: BSP’s Sixth Rate Cut and the Late-Cycle Reckoning August 31, 2025 (substack) 

-Philippine Banks: June’s Financial Losses and Liquidity Strains Expose Late-Cycle Fragility August 7, 2025 (substack) 

-Liquidity Under Pressure: Philippine Banks Struggle in Q1 2025 Amid a Looming Fiscal Storm May 18, 2025 (substack) 

-BSP’s Fourth Rate Cut: Who Benefits, and at What Cost? April 13, 2025 (substack) 

CMEPA 

The CMEPA Delusion: How Fallacious Arguments Conceal the Risk of Systemic Blowback July 27, 2025 (substack)

The Seen, the Unseen, and the Taxed: CMEPA as Financial Repression by Design July 20,2025 (substack) 

  

Is San Miguel’s Ever-Growing Debt the "Sword of Damocles" Hanging over the Philippine Economy and the PSE?

 

Every Ponzi is sold as a non-zero sum store of value. Every Ponzi investor believes the investment is a non-zero sum store of value—Nassim Nicolas Taleb

Is San Miguel’s Ever-Growing Debt the "Sword of Damocles" Hanging over the Philippine Economy and the PSE? 

San Miguel’s Q3 and nine-month sales performance validated the signs of a weakening economy. However, while the company reduced its debt from Php 1.484 trillion to Php 1.477 trillion, its practices exhibit symptoms of Minsky’s Ponzi finance.

I. San Miguel’s Slowing Sales Resonated with the Economy 

San Miguel’s 9-month sales performance demonstrates the weakening of the Philippine economy which was not limited to consumers.  

Given the current loose economic conditions, supported by the first BSP rate cut and the "Marcos-nomics" stimulus, it is surprising to see a contraction in cement and real estate revenues, as well as a downturn in infrastructure sales growth. For a company that has shifted its business model to rely heavily on political projects or enterprises, this downturn should be a cause for concern. 

Additionally, the consumer spending slowdown was pronounced in the context of declining food and packaging sales—which eked out marginal growth. 

SMC reported a Q3 revenue increase of only 3.9%—which would be flat once adjusted for inflation! 

Q3 sales pulled down the 9-month revenue growth, which clocked in at 11.2%.

In any case, despite a slight drop in margins, SMC reported income growth of 18.9%, amounting to Php 37.1 billion.

Despite this income growth, SMC’s outstanding debt fell only by Php 7.43 billion to Php 1.477 trillion from its 1H historic high of Php 1.485 trillion. 

II. San Miguel’s Incredible Short-term Debt Recycling, Deeper Signs of Ponzi Financing? 

However, this situation appears to be a result of smoke and mirrors, as the heavily leveraged holding firm raised approximately Php 71.4 billion through various preferred share issuances by its subsidiaries to bridge its financing gap. 

The issuance of preferred shares has potential impacts on common shareholders. Preferred shares typically have priority over common shares in receiving dividends and claims to assets. As a result, common shareholders may see reduced dividends, as preferred shareholders must be paid first. In the event of liquidation, preferred shareholders also have a higher claim on assets. 

A closer look at their cash flow statement reveals a striking example of debt recycling, reminiscent of Hyman Minsky’s "Ponzi finance." 

SMC borrowed an additional Php 110 billion in short-term debt, bringing the total to Php 933.794 billion, to pay off a rising Php 898.657 billion in loans. 

Professor Minsky described this as "Borrowing to pay interest or selling assets to pay interest (and even dividends) on common stock lowers the equity of a unit, even as it increases liabilities and the prior commitment of future incomes. A unit that Ponzi finances lowers the margin of safety that it offers the holders of its debts" (Hyman Minsky, 1992) 

Incredible! 

SMC’s Q3 interest payments rose by 10% to Php 25.05 billion, marking its second-highest level.

Although SMC reported a 6% increase in cash, amounting to Php 15.9 billion and totaling Php 281.2 billion, this figure remains significantly lower than its short-term liabilities of Php 383 billion, which raises the firm’s liquidity risks. 

III. Is SMC’s Debt the "Sword of Damocles" Hanging over the Philippine Economy and the PSE? 

To put this in perspective, SMC’s 9-month 2024 Php 1.477 trillion debt is equivalent to 6.6% of the estimated 2024 GDP and 4.5% of total financial resources (Q3). 

It is a telltale sign of the expanding concentration risk in the economy, or the 'too big to fail' phenomenon. What could go wrong? 

Its opportunity costs translate into either productive lending to the broader economy or financing competitiveness among SMEs. 

This also means that even at zero interest rates, the mounting scale of Ponzi finance or debt recycling is virtually unsustainable. 

It would likewise be a blatant mistake to assume that "what happens in SMC stays in SMC." 

As a counterparty to lenders, a liquidity crunch or potential insolvency won’t just affect the health of the banking system, the fixed-income market, or, indirectly, the Treasury markets—it could have broader economic and political repercussions. 

A liquidity squeeze could affect both direct and indirect industry and consumer linkages to SMC’s businesses.

Moreover, a political decision to bail out SMC would likely fuel inflation, which would come at the expense of the Philippine peso.

Sadly, could SMC represent the proverbial "Damocles' Sword" hanging over the Philippine economy, the financial system, and the Philippine Stock Exchange?

Interestingly, SMC share prices appear to have recently behaved like a pegged currency, with entity/ies defending the lower band (price floor) during the 5-minute pre-close period for several days, maintaining the Php 88 level (as of November 29) Previously, the lower band was at around Php 88.7.

___

reference  

Hyman P. Minsky The Financial Instability Hypothesis The Jerome Levy Economics Institute of Bard College May 1992

 

Escalating Systemic Risk: As Cash Reserves Plummeted, San Miguel’s 9M Debt Zoomed to an Astonishing Php 1.405 TRILLION!

 

In economics, things take longer to happen than you think they will, and then they happen faster than you thought they could― Rudiger Dornbusch 

In this issue 

 

Escalating Systemic Risk: As Cash Reserves Plummeted, San Miguel’s 9M Debt Zoomed to an Astonishing Php 1.405 TRILLION! 

I. The Public’s Blind Spot: San Miguel’s 9M Debt Zoomed to an Astonishing Php 1.405 TRILLION!  

II. San Miguel’s Worsening Liquidity Crunch! 

III. SMC’s Debt-in, Debt-out Dynamics: Mounting Signs of Hyman Minsky’s Ponzi Finance Dynamic in Motion 

IV. SMC’s Escalating Fragility: Intensifying Concentration and Counterparty Risks 

 

Escalating Systemic Risk: As Cash Reserves Plummeted, San Miguel’s 9M Debt Zoomed to an Astonishing Php 1.405 TRILLION! 

 

The public seems unaware that the published debt of one of the Philippines' largest listed firms, San Miguel, has skyrocketed into the stratosphere! Why this represents a systemic risk.

 

I. The Public’s Blind Spot: San Miguel’s 9M Debt Zoomed to an Astonishing Php 1.405 TRILLION!

Figure 1 

It was a surprise that this tweet on San Miguel's [PSE: SMC] debt had an explosive reach, interactions, and responses, given my tiny X (formerly Twitter) account (few followers).  

 

Except for comparing its nominal growth with SMC's free float market capitalization and my conclusion, "This won't end well," the tweet was mainly about facts and barely an analysis.   The Fintweet world seems astounded by the "new" information.   If my conjectures are accurate, this only exposed the public's blind spots on the escalating systemic fragilities.    

 

Why has the public been sucker punched?

 

SMC has openly published their debt conditions not only in their 17Q and 17As but, more importantly, in their "analyst briefing presentations."  

Yet, there have been barely any mentions of these in social media or discussions of the consensus experts.   Mainstream news has signified an echo chamber of corporate press releases fixating on the top and bottom lines (in percentages).   

 

Other than these, a deafening silence. Possible reasons: Selective attention? The Principal-Agent Problem? Shaping the Overton Window? 

 

II. San Miguel’s Worsening Liquidity Crunch! 

 

San Miguel reported a Php 31.187 billion net income in the three quarters of 2023.  That's 141% or Php 18.242 billion improvement from a year ago.   

 

Compared to the PSEi 30 peers, SMC generated the most income in % and pesos in Q3 2023, resulting in the second-best income growth in the last three quarters after JGS.  

Figure 2 

Interestingly, despite the so-called profit boom, SMC borrowed a whopping Php 68.2 billion in Q3 to send its debt level to a mind-boggling Php 1.405 TRILLION!  T-R-I-L-L-I-O-N!  (Figure 1, upper window) Of course, this hasn't been a strange dynamic to us. 

 

SMC has increased the pace of its quarterly borrowing growth in pesos.  It has borrowed over Php 50 billion in the last 5 of the six quarters!  

 

And yes, the 9M aggregate debt growth of Php 153.02 billion represents around 62% of SMC's free market float as of November 17th. 

 

Strikingly, Q3 borrowing exceeded the firm's 9M GROSS profits of Php 62.875 billion!  

 

And despite the profits and the borrowing, SMC's cash reserves plummeted by 18.7% or by Php 60.984 billion! 

 

As a result, current liabilities of Php 450 billion soared past cash reserves of Php 265 billion, which extrapolates to the widest deficit (Php 184.9 billion) ever!  (Figure 1, lower graph)

 

In short, like Metro Pacific, underneath the consensus talking points, SMC has been plagued by a developing liquidity crunch.   

 

III. SMC’s Debt-in, Debt-out Dynamics: Mounting Signs of Hyman Minsky’s Ponzi Finance Dynamic in Motion 

Figure 3 

 

SMC's interest expenses have recently soared, even as it dipped in Q3. 

 

Its quarterly share of gross margins has been on an uptrend since 2016. (Figure 3, topmost pane)

  

To be sure, BSP's recent rate hikes have worsened SMC's onus exhibited by the rising interest expense.  

 

But it isn't interest rates alone.  Rising debt levels are the biggest contributor to SMC's mounting debt burden. (Figure 3, middle and lower charts)

Figure 4 

 

SMC's FX exposure represents about half of its debt liabilities. (Figure 4, upper chart)

 

From SMC's Q3 17Q: "The increase in interest expense and other financing charges was mainly due to higher average loan balance of SMC and Petron coupled with higher interest rates."  

 

Though the net income (before interest and tax) bounce has lifted SMC's Interest Coverage Ratio (ICR) above the 1.5% threshold, the above numbers show why "EBIT" could be erroneous, and thus, the dubiety of the higher ICR. (Figure 4, lower graph)

 

Remember, Php 450 billion of 9M SMC's debt is due for payment within a year (current), while "net cash flows provided by operating activities accounted" for Php 142.450 billion during this "profit boom."  Aside from the current borrowing to bridge the current gap, if cash flows sink further, wouldn't this require even more borrowing? 

 

To be more precise, to survive, SMC requires continuous borrowings to fund this ever-widening gap, or it may eventually be required to sell its assets soon!  

 

And this dynamic, as we have repeatedly been pointing out, represents Hyman Minsky's "Ponzi finance." 

 

For Ponzi units, the cash flows from operations are not sufficient to fulfill either the repayment of principle or the interest due on outstanding debts by their cash flows from operations. Such units can sell assets or borrow. Borrowing to pay interest or selling assets to pay interest (and even dividends) on common stock lowers the equity of a unit, even as it increases liabilities and the prior commitment of future incomes. A unit that Ponzi finances lowers the margin of safety that it offers the holders of its debts. (Minsky, 1992) 

 

That is to say, the prospect of the BSP's lowering of interest rates will do little to ease or mitigate SMC's intensifying cash-flow stream predicament.  

 

IV. SMC’s Escalating Fragility: Intensifying Concentration and Counterparty Risks

 

And that's not all. 

 

It's also about escalating CONCENTRATION and CONTAGION risks. 

 

SMC accounted for 24% and 25% of the PSEi 30's 9M and Q3 gross revenues, 19.3% of 9M cash reserve, and 26.8% gross debt.   

 

SMC's 9M net debt growth of Php 153.019 billion signified the dominant majority or 71.82% of the PSEi 30's Php 213.07 trillion net debt growth!  Amazing.  

 

Figure 5

Here’s the kicker: SMC's Php 1.405 TRILLION debt represents a stunning 4.71% share of the BSP's Total Financial Resources at Php 29.855 trillion—which is at an ALL-TIME HIGH! (Figure 5)

 

Expressly, aside from the government, the financial system has vastly increased its exposure to SMC, which comes at the expense of more productive firms and which translates to savings/capital consumption. 

 

And the financial system's record exposure to SMC also raises systemic fragility.  That is to say, it is not only a problem of SMC but also a COUNTERPARTY risk.   

 

So, in addition to the expanded risks to SMC’s equity and bondholders, as Hyman Minsky theorized, other creditors, suppliers, employees, and the daisy chain or lattice network of firms doing business with SMC (directly and indirectly) may suffer from a creditor's "sudden stop."  

 

That being said, the buildup of SMC’s risks represents a non-linear, non-proportional, and asymmetrical feedback loop.  

 

Aside from political entrepreneurship, the BSP's easy money regime has fostered and nurtured SMC's privileged financial status, which increasingly depended on the expansion and recycling of credit.  As such, SMC has transformed into a "too big to fail" firm.   

 

When crunch time arrives, will the BSP (and) or Bureau of Treasury bailout SMC?  Or, will these agencies finance a bailout of it by a consortium of firms? 

 

How will these impact the economy and the capital markets? 

Stay tuned. 

 

____ 

References 

 

San Miguel Corporation, SEC Form 17Q, Management Discussion and Analysis; Edge.PSE.com.ph, P.8, Table p.18; November 15, 2023 

 

Hyman P. Minsky The Financial Instability Hypothesis The Jerome Levy Economics Institute of Bard College May 1992