"Are Money Funds Safe Now?"
Kiplinger's asks "Are Money Funds Safe Now?" The piece says, "[M]oney funds are headed for a more comprehensive makeover. You can expect heightened regulation that would, among other things, limit portfolio risk, ensure minimum levels of cash to meet withdrawals, disclose more details about investments, and ensure that, in the event of a run, the first shareholders out the door won't be cutting their losses at the expense of those who remain. Most funds already comply with most of the suggestions on the table." The magazine quotes Peter Crane, "The market has ruthlessly addressed the risk in money funds -- they've gone conservative." "New regulations won't reduce yields any more than they've already been clipped by investing more conservatively, says Crane. What you're less likely to see: funds with floating net asset values, or $10-a-share NAVs." In other news, The Boston Globe writes "Columbia's tangled web", which says, "It comes as no shock that struggling Bank of America Corp. would be interested in unloading its money management arm headquartered in Boston. Here's the puzzler: Why would someone want to buy Columbia Management Group, or at least purchase it at a price that would be considered attractive to the capital-challenged Bank of America?" The Globe continues, "Columbia's $340 billion of assets includes about $142 billion of money market funds, according to Peter Crane of Crane Data LLC, a money fund research firm in Westborough. It quotes Crane, "Both Columbia and Legg Mason are seen as being the hardest hit with the SIV issue. They weren't nearly the worst cases, but they were the biggest, so the numbers are just gigantic."
