ACTAECONOMICA

33, e-ISSN 2232-738X

ACTA ECONOMICA


:

, , 78000
4
E-mail: kontakt@efbl.org

:
. ,

:
. ,
. ,
. ,
. . ,
. , ,
. , ,
. ,
. , ,
:
.
:
,
:

:
, . . .
:
,
: 400

ACTA ECONOMICA
VIII, 13

, 2010


C O N T E N T S

THE ANALYSIS OF THE BOTTOM LINE OF PROFITABILITY AND THE ANALYSIS OF

THE RISK OF STOCK COMPANY

......................................................................................................... 9

-
INNOVATION FINANCIAL INDUSTRY IN SERBIAN CAPITAL MARKETSECURITIZATION MORTGAGE LOANS

. ............................................................................................... 39


INVESTMENT FUNDS AND COMPANIES AS INSTITUTIONAL INVESTORS IN
FINANCIAL MARKETS

....................................................................................................... 75

THE ANALYZE OF CURRENT LEVEL OF USE OF PUBLIC RELATIONS IN

INSTITUTIONS OF BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

.................................................................................................... 95

THE PENALTIES FOR MONOPOLY BEHAVIOR CARTELS

............................................................................................................ 119
SUBPRIME ,

THE SUBPRIME MORTGAGE LOANS AS AN INITIATOR TO ACCELERATE THE
EMERGENCE OF CREDIT MORTGAGE CRISIS

................................................................................................... 141

THE EURO AND CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS

......................................................................................................... 163

Acta Economica

ANALYSIS OF YIELD INVESTORS IN CAPITAL MARKET BONDS OF THE REPUBLIC

OF SERBIAN

, ......................................................................... 173

" "

CAPITAL MARKET IN THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA IN THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION

"EMERGING MARKETS"

................................................................................................. 199
FINANSIJSKA OCJENA INOSTRANIH INVESTICIONIH PROJEKATA
HE FINANCIAL APPRAISAL OF THE FOREIGN INVESTMENT PROJECTS

........................................................................................................... 225

 005.915

THE ANALYSIS OF THE BOTTOM LINE OF PROFITABILITY

AND THE ANALYSIS OF THE RISK OF STOCK COMPANY
*

, .
,
, .
, ,
.

.
,
, .


.

, ,

Acta Economica

: , , , , ,
.

Summary
Analysis of the bottom profitability point aims to define necessary production volume, i.e. sales while the neutral business and financial result of the
company is being realized. This analysis is short-term but due to its simplicity
and efficiency, it is widely used regardless the size of the company and the type
of the industry. Turning cash point enables managers of the companies to make
important business decisions connected the production volume, level of consumer prices, choice of the range of products etc.
Analysis of the bottom profitability point is consistent with the risk analysis
of the company business. Income statement represents the cardinal financial report based on which subject analyses are worked out, but we should keep in
mind that it is necessary to make its modification, i.e. to apply the account system according to variable costs.
Business and financial risk represent uncertainty regarding realizing business profit and net income and they are quantified through business and financial leverage coefficient.
The level of business and financial risk influence decision making on the capital structure, i.e. it influences decision making on the way and forms of financing the company.
Key words: bottom profitability point, profitability, marginal profit, relevant
area of the production, business leverage, financial leverage, and total leverage.

.

" " (Cost Volume Profit) breakeven analysis.
/,
.
10

,
( ).
.
, ,
,
.1
( II)

, .
,
.

.
, , , .
, , .
. , ( ) ,
.
, . , ,
.
. ,

,
EBIT (Earnings before interest and taxes) .

11

Acta Economica

. , .

. , , . : , , , . , .
,
( ).
, .
, ,
.
(
),
,
.
:
. 1: ) ) )

.

( ),
/. 12

().

. .

. (
).

.
:

VT = k X , :
VT ,
X
k .
(
) , x :

FT = c , :
FT ,
c .
,
. .
, , x . ( ):

RF = d , :
RF (),
d .

. :

UP = kX , :
UP ,
X /,
13

Acta Economica

k .

.
, , . ,
(, ), .

: .


,
(Direct Costing). Direct Costing
.
,
. Direct Costing
:
1. ,
2. ,
3. (1 2),
4. ,
5. (3 4),
6. (),2
7. (5 6),
8. ,
9. (7 8).
(
: , ), .
2

14

,
/, , .3

()
, (DTRI)
(DTRII).

(DTRI)
,
(EBIT) .

(DTRII), ,
.
. ,
/.4

UP = p X
/.
() .

UT = FT +VT UT = FT + (v X )
DTRI () .

p X = FT + v X
3

, : , , 1999, . 45.
4
.
.

15

Acta Economica

X =

FT
, :
p v

X ,
FT ,
p ,
v .
p v ( ).

(EBIT-).
- DTRII ,
.

UP = FT + (v X ) + RF p X = FT + (v X ) + RF
DTRII =

FT + RF
p v

(DTRI)
(DTRII).

. ,
, .
,
.
.
.
(EBIT = 0).

DTRI =

16

FT
*
smd

smd =

MP
UP VT
VT

smd = 1
*
UP
UP
UP
DTRI =

FT
, :
VT
1
UP

DTRI
,
FT ,
smd ,
UP ,
VT .
DTRII,
, :

DTRII =

FT + RF
FT + RF
DTRII =
, :
VT
smd
1
UP

DTRII
,
FT ,
RF (),
smd ,
UP ,
VT .

(EBIT)
100, ,
DTRI. (EBIT),
100%.

.

:
100, :

17

Acta Economica

EBIT
(EBIT),

UP ,
PPEBIT (EBIT).
DTRII (
) ,
. , DTRII
:
, :

DTRII DTRII,
UP ,
PPDTRII DTRII.
.
: "" . 2.000.000 .
1.400.000 .
300.000 .
,
150.000 . DTRI DTRII,
.
,
Direct Costing .
1.
2.000.000
2.
1.400.000
3.
600.000
4.
300.000
5. EBIT ( )
300.000
6. ()
150.000
7.
150.000
8. ( 9 %)
13.500
9.
136.500

DTRI =
18

300.000
= 1.000.000
0,3

, ,
1.000.000 . , , DTRII.

DTRII =

300.000 + 150.000
= 1.500.000
0,3

50 %
(EBIT = 0), .
DTRII 75%.
DTRI :
2.000.000 1.000.000
2.000.000
DTRII :

0,5050%

2.000.000 1.500.000
0,2525%
2.000.000
, ,
1.000 700 :

,
DTRII =

300.000 + 150.000 450.000

=
= 1.500 .
1.000 700
300

DTRI DTRII :
. 1: DTRI DTRII ""

DTRII
DTRI
450.000
300.000
X1=1.000kom.

X2=1.500kom

19

Acta Economica

,
. .
, . ,
,
Direct Costing .
,
,
, .

, . .
, , .
, .

.
. x .

. .
. ,
, ().
. /.


:

20

. 2: DTRI
,
UP
UT=FT+VT

DTRI

VT
F

FT

X1

Xn

.
DTRI, :
UP,
p.
x y=F,
FT.
y
F v.
UP UT DTRI.
x X1.
3:
. 3: DTRII
,
UP
UT=FT+VT+RF

DTRI

RF
F

X2

Xn

21

Acta Economica

DTRII :
UP, p.
y RF
v.
UP UT DTRII.
x X2.

.

.

, ,
, . ,

.
:
.

.

. ,

.
.

, .
, .
. 22

.
/.

( /). , , , .

.
, ,
.
.
:
. 5:

,

X1

Xo

X2

,
EBIT / {-X1} {X2 - }. {X1-X2}, . / X.
/ . , / X.
23

Acta Economica

(x), (x),
, . (x)= (x)-(x).
, .
D ' x = p ' x t ' x = 0 . X0.
( )
, . :
. .

, .

. . .
.
. - 1 . , ,
.

.
. , . ,
.
,
.
,
,
.
, ,
,
24

.

. .
.
:
,


.

.
"
, , , ",
.5
:
,
.

, .

,
.

.

.
, :
,
y ,
,
,
5

J. F. Weston, T. E. Copeland: Managerial Finance, 8the Edition, The Dryden Pres, Chichago,
1989, str. 387.

25

Acta Economica

,
.
, :
,
,
.

.
, , :
,

.
, , :
, .

, .
,
, . ,
EBIT-, ,
. ,
.
.
(),
, . . ,
.

.
26

DTRI ( . 6),

(EBIT), DTRI
.
. 6: DTRI
,

UT

UP

DTRI

X1

, /
DTRI, /.

().
x ,
. , "", ,
.
.
. ,
.

(EBIT), ,

. , , -

27

Acta Economica

.6
, , .
:

1.

%
%

, :

Kpl ,
PD ,
PP .
2. Kpl /
.
, : .
. , .
:
ROIC = NOPAT / K,
ROIC ,
NOPAT ( ),
K .
, . .
(ROIC = ROE).
ROE = / , .

, .

28

,
ROE.
, .
. , , .

, , .
, :
.
.
. , , .
.
.
. .
.

. ,
, .
.
.

. , .
/ . , /, .
29

Acta Economica

. ,
, ,
. , , .
( ) .
, . ,
.
, . ,
, . , , .
: ?
, , , , . . .
, , , , .

, .

, . , , , . , . ,
, ,
30

. , , .
. , ,
, .
(
),
.

, . . , .

. :
.
.
, .
.7
:
1. .
2. .
3. .
4. .
.

(4).
, () .
7

: , , ,
1991.

31

Acta Economica

EBIT- .

, :

Kfl ,
PD EBIT,
BD .

, .
, ,
.
:

%
%

( ) :
,
,
.

, ,
.
, .
.
,
" ".
:
, .

.
32

.
.
, .
, ,
. , ,
, .
, .
, .
, . .
, , .
.
.
10.000 ,
7.000 , ( ) 3.000 .
1.
2.000
2.
400
3.
1.600
4.
600
1.000
5.
6. ( 7%)
210
7.
790
8. (20%)
158
9.
632

10%

1000
100
10000

7%
33

Acta Economica

= 9%

,
,
:
1.
2.000
2.
400
3.
1.600
4.
600
5.
1.000
6. ()
0
7.
1000
8. (20%)
200
9.
800
=

10%
7%
800
100 8%
10000

, , .
.

(10%) (7%).
, ,
.
,
, . .
,
, .
, ,
( ). ,

34

. , ,

.
. :
.

( ) .
.
. .

() , :

Kul Kpl Kfl,:

Kul ,
Kpl ,
Kfl .
,

, :

MD ,
PD ,
PO .
(DTRII) /, .
:

35

Acta Economica
. 2:

$$$

EBIT
%

, .

.
.

,

.

. .

,
.
,
.
, , .
, ,

36

: , .

1. , : ,
, 1991.
2. J. F. Weston, T. E. Copeland: Managerial Finance, 8the Edition, The
Dryden Pres, Chichago, 1989. godina.
3. , : ,

, , 1999.
4. , : , ,
, 1993.
5. , :
, , , ,
2006.
6. , : , , ,
2009.
7. , : , , , 1996.
8. , : , ,
1997.

37

 336.77:332 (497.1)

INNOVATION FINANCIAL INDUSTRY IN SERBIAN CAPITAL

MARKET-SECURITIZATION MORTGAGE LOANS
. *

, , .

. , . ,
. , , .
*

. , ""

Acta Economica

. , . .

.
: , , , ,
, , , .

Summary
This work deals with legal and institutional presumptions and limits of the
application of financial innovation of securitization on the market of the capital
of Serbia. Aim is to show the possibility of implementing this financial innovation into the market of capital of Serbia, relying on theoretical and empiric
knowledge of developed markets of securitization. The securitization is defined
in this study and the typical types and characteristics of securitization are identified. The main drives and motives and structures of securitization are explained. This work points out the risks and also advantages and disadvantages of
securitization as well as basics of its application and functioning. The key instructions of securitization in European Union and experience in application in
those countries are discussed afterwards. A short review of the problems that
countries in transition confront in the course implementing of this financial innovation is given. In the end the proposition of the draft of the law about securitization in Serbia not yet accepted is analyzed. And finally certain legal and
institutional presumptions of vital importance for the implementation of this financial innovation in the market of the capital of Serbia are identified.
Key words: securitization, MBS, the property, mortgage bonds, originator,
SVP, risk, investor

,

.

. 40

,
, , ,
, .
, , ,
, . , , , ,
.
" "
, , , , . ( ) Lewisa Ranijerija, , Salomon Brothers .
, , , . , , . , , ,
, .
,
. , , .
,
, ,
, ,
, .
3 . ,
, 41

Acta Economica

, ,
. ,
. ,
.
, ,
, -. , , .

1.
1.1.
1,
ad hoc . Fabozzijeva
(1998) Salomon
Brothers , : " " Merriam-Websters Collegiate Dictionary, ,
, , . ,
.
Banksu,(2005), "
, ,
". Culp (2006), "
." Standard & Poors, (2003)
" ."
1

1977. "Heard on the Street"

Wall Street Journal Bank of America preko Solomon Brothers-a .

42

(, , ) ,
. ,
(mortage-backed
securities MBS). , , " ( )
" (Breidenbach, . 2003).
1.2.
,
. . () .

():
(asset-backed securities ) , , , ,
, 30
(Burke, W. M 2005).
(mortgage-backed securities MBS)
,
:
(mortage pass-through security PTS)
(collateralized mortage
obligation CMO),
(stripped mortage backed security SMBS), (, 2006).
(collateralised debt obligations
CDO).
(collateralised loan obligations CLO),
(collateralize bond obligations CBO) (Breidenbach, M.
2003).

43

Acta Economica

Strips 2 pass-throgh ,
,
.
Callable Pass-through
pass-through callable class call class.
callable ,
call class, ,
callable , callable .
1.3.

, . :
1. ( ),
2. ( ),
3. ,
4. (),
5. ,
6. .
:
1. ,
2. .
1.4.
:
Origination and Servicing ( originate and distribute). ,
.
. 2

. 7% pass-through ,
8% 5%.

44

(). , (). ,
(, 2009). , ,
, .
.
.
" " (True Sale). ,
(), , , " " (tru sale). . " ", . ,
. .
, .
(Special Purpose Vehicle - SPV).3
, (loan originator) (underwriter), . 4 , , .
.
, , "".

3

, (special purpose
vehicle-SPV), () ofor ( ).
4
() . , () . ().

45

Acta Economica

. , .

()
. , () ,
. ,
. , , , . ,
, (trust) . 5
.
. , , . ,
" ", / (conduit) , ""
, (" "), ,
,
,
.
- . . , ,
. , ,
.
:
(collateral quality),
(bankruptcy-remoteness),
(pool administration).
,
. , . 5

, ,
, .

46

, ()
.
(trust) .
,
. ,
.( nomura.com)
(Credit Enhancement).
6
,

.
, . ( ) ( ).
, ,7
. .
,
() ,
. Over-collateralization ,
. .
. 6

"Six Pack Strukture", .
Alt-MBS .
7
() (), . ()
(risk/return profile)

() . ""
"" "mezanin" (. mezzanine = )
"" ,
"" . "" "mezanin" "" (
"" ,
). , "mezanin" ""
"mezanin" "" .

47

Acta Economica

. , .
8 , , . (overcollateralization). (Baron, 2000) 9 , ,
, . ,
"private-label" , , , .
, overcollateralization
.
, (Underwriter),
, ( ) . , ,
.
, , ,
, . , ,
. ,
. ,
8
GSEs ( ) ,
, .
9
, - . Government National Mortgage Association, GNMA Ginnie
Mae , . Ginnie
Mae , ,
. . Federal National Mortgage Association, FNMA Fannie
Mae () .
, .
Fannie Mae je . , g. Federal Home
Loan Mortgage Corporation, FHLMC Freddie , . , Freddie Mac je Freddie Mac
. .
.

48

, .
.

, ,
. , , ,
.
(Dealers) ,
. , ,
.
, . , . , , ,
( )
,
. ,
, .
, (over-the-counter),

.
, , . . ,
( , , , , ) .
1.000 $ 25.000$, . : , , , , , , , .

49

Acta Economica
1:

()

()

(
)

(),
1

: , ., (2009): - , Montenegrin Journal of economics N 9

1.5.
.
(pass-through) .
(structured finance)
.

,
(multiclass instruments) , . (Graffam R 2000).
, ,
. , , off-shore
-, , . ,

50

. (Burke, 2000)
() :
1. "Pass through"10 ,
2. "Pay through" .
"Pass through" (),
( ), () ,
(pass-though)
. (bond.com)
,
. "pass-though"

,
.
.
( ) "pass-though"
, , ,
( ) (Goldman Sachs Asset Management). "passthough" , , 30 , 15,7 (bond.com). , "pass-though"
"" (loan originator) .
"Pay through" "pass through" , ().
()
, "" ()
. "Pay through"
. ,
, "pay through" ,
, "pass through"
. "pay through" , .
()
10

Pass-though- "-"

51

Acta Economica

. (), , . "pay through"11 . (Colletta, Shenker 1999).

() Basel II (
) :
(Traditional securitisation strukture),
(Synthetic securitisation strukture).
(Traditional securitisation
strukture)
(special-purpose vehicle). ,
(cash flow)
,
. . 12 /
()

, /
.
.
13 (Synthetic securitisation strukture)
, .

. , .
, (assets)

11

() .
12
"Senior" , "mezanin", "" , . ""
, 4-5 %,
. "mezanin" "" .
13
, . , . "" .

52

, " "14 (first

loss position). , (senior position)15
" " (super senior position)16.
(first loss position) (super senior position)
"" (mezzanine)17 ,
(most senior) " " (
" "). (, 2006) , , , (funded)
, (unfunded) . .
, :
1. .
2. .
1.6.

, , , ,
"" ,
, . , ,
, . ,
.
14

(First Loss Tranche). , .

15
(Senior Tranche), . ,
,
.
16
(Super Senior Tranche). ,
( ).
.
17
(Mezzanine Tranche).
,
.

53

Acta Economica

,
, .
,
( )
,
.
, - , .18
, ( )
, .
, ,
() -- (LTV- Loan To Value )19
100%, ,
,
,
.
, 20 (DSCR Debt Service Coverage Ratio), . DSCR cash-flow
. DSCR , . 1.25,
.
, (packagsrs) ( ) " ", ( ),
, (). (
) 18

: , , , , (
), , , , , , .

19
(LTV- Loan To Value). . LTV
80%, 95% .
20
, .
. .

54

. , .
, (packagr), ( ) () .
, , . (Lawrence, J. W. 2004).

. , :
1. ,
2. - , "" (senior securities) "" (subordinated securities),
,
,
.
, ,
, 4 20%, .
.
,
, . , ,
.
.21 . , ,
. . , ,
, ,
""22 .
, , , , . ,
21

, 30 , 15
22
, "" ""
()

55

Acta Economica

. , , , , .
, ( ),
"" , . , , , , ( ),
. , ,
,
. , (
) : (Lawrence, J. W. 2004).
, ,
,
,
( " "),
.
. , ,
,
, . ,
" " (CMOS). , , , ,
, ,

, , . ,
, ,
() .
1.7.
, , , , , , .
56

. ,
, ,
,
, , , . ,
, , .
, ,
,
, .
, .
, , , ,
" ". , . , , ,
.
.
,
. , , , , ,
, , . , ,
, " ",

, ,
.
" ". ,
/ ,
, CMO (multi-tranche) . ,
( PO-principal-only security) ( IO-interest-only security) PO IO
.
57

Acta Economica

" " .
,
.

, :
1. , ,
. , (packagr)
, (packagr) , ,
.

, "" "" .
2.
,
.
(). .
,
, . , . , , ,
, ,
, . 23,
. (subprime mortgages).
23

70- , . ,
. , (subprime
mortgages) "" , ""
, , , ,

58

3. , ( ), "" .
"" , ( ), , , ""
leverage-a, ,
, , .
1.8.
,
. :

.

() , .
, .
, , , , , , ).
.
, ,
, 1933 .
, ( )
, , , . -
, . , ,
.

59

Acta Economica

, ,
()
.
, :
originators, servicers
,

,
( )
,


,

, ,
- , , , , , , , - ,
(, ,
, , ) .

2.
(pass-through
mortgage-backed securities) , 24, ""

(Government National Mortgage Association - GNMA ili Ginnie Mae).
,
, .25 ,
24

(mortgage-backed securities)
,
, 80- XX , ,
, , , .
25

60

,
.
90- , ,
" ",
() , ,
.
, , , , .
2.1.
, . , ,
" " ", " . (Altunbas, 2007)
.
:
1988, , (Council Directive 85/611/EEC of 20 December 1985 on the coordination of laws,
regulations and administrative provisions relating, 85/611 Directive on Undertakings for Collective Investments in Transferable Securities (UCITS)) i
2006/48/EC EU, (EU Capital Requirement Directive) 1. 2008. UCITS26
,
.
, , 25%
26

UCITS
( 22 ).

61

Acta Economica

. (ECBC 2009) UCITS, 1992

., , Covered Bonds , ,
40% . ,
,
. (, 2007). , . ,
, , .
(mortgage bonds) (on balance sheet securitization). . , , .
:
Covered Bonds ,
Covered Bonds
,
( ),
, ,
,
() ,
, .
Capital Requirement Directive, 2006 , Bazelu II,
, , ,
,
VI, 68-71:
Covered bonds UCITS 22.,


,
62

(
80% 60% ).
,

. ,
,
, . : (ECBC 2009)

,
()
,
,
,
.
Covered Bonds ,
.
20 %
. 2008 . 2.38 , (Covered Bonds, , ),
12% . Covered Bonds
,
, .
,
:
, ,

,
- ,
,
( , ) ,
.
63

Acta Economica

, , , , ,
. ,
. , .
. ,
, ,
.
, , , . ,
,
(European Securitisation Forum, ESF)
.
,
, , 50 100%
. 50% , , ,
. . .
. , , ( ). .


.
,
.
2.2.
,
, .
.
64

, , . ,

. , ,
, , , , ( ), , ,
. ,
,

, .

.

3.
3.1.
, , , , , . 2007. , 17. 2008. .

, . , ,
.
, .( 2009)
, :
(
2006/48 , ):
,
65

Acta Economica

66

.
, ,
,
,
,
, , , , ,
, , ,
Basel II Accord-om,
,
,
,
. , . .
:
,
, ,
,

,
,
,
,
,

( ),
,
, . "" ,

,
, ,
,
, , ,
,
. ( , 2008)
, . ,
,
,
, ,
, ,
,
.
,
.
, ,
. , , ,

, .
Mayer Brown LLP publications "Securitization in Serbia: some Legal" 2009 ., , 27 , , .
, ,
,
27

, , .,
, , ,
.

67

Acta Economica

,
.
,
, , . , ,

. (, 2009)
2: .

: , . (2009) , National Bank of Greece Serbia

3.2.
Mayer Brown LLP, Mayer Brown International LLP . : )
, )
, ) ) )
. (Mayer Brown 2009)

68

, , , , ,
:
,
,
,
,
.

, , ,
,
,
,
,
, , ,
28, . , ,
.
,
,
,
,

.
, , , :
28

, . , (bondholdrse), , , . , ,
, , .

69

Acta Economica

(, )
( ), "" , .
, , ,
, , , ,
.
() ,

().
(
)
( , ),
, , , , , , , , , , , ,
.
,
,
.
, :

,
()
. ,
cash-flow ,
, , cash-flow . ,
,
,
. ,
70

,
,
.
,
.
.

,

, ,
, ,
, , ,
, . .

, , .
, , , , . ,
, , .
. ,
, , over-counter market,
, ,
.
.
. , ( ), , , 71

Acta Economica

. () ( ) ,
, ,
, , ,
, .
.
, , . , ,
.
.
, () .
, .
.
,
"" . , , ,
, . . ,
, ,
.
,
, , .
, ,
,
( , ), , , , .

72

1. Banks, E.,(2005): Catastrophic, Risk: Analysis and Management, John

Willey, Sons, Ltd,West Sussex, England, str. 101.
2. Baron, N. D.,(2000): "The Role of Rating Agencies in the Securitization
Process", in Kendall, L. T., M. J. Fishman (eds.), A Primer of Securitization, MIT press paperback edition,
3. Breidenbach, M.,(2003): "Real Estate Securitization as an Alternative
Source of Financing for the Property Industry", Paper presented at the
9th Annual Conference of the Pacific-Rim Real Estate Society, Brisbane
4. Burke, W. M.,(2000): Handbook on Cross-Border Securitization, Shearman & Sterling Hong Kong & Tokyo
5. Culp, C.,(2006): Structured Finance and Insurances, John Willey, Sons,
Inc, New Jersey, str. 341
6. Fabozzi, F. J. Overview. (1998): In F. J. Fabozzi (Ed.). Handbook of
Structured Financial Products. New Hope, PA: Frank J. Fabozzi Associates, str. 15.
7. Fontaine, M., J. Gorp, R. Hugi, and B. Sabahi (2008): Synthetic securitizations under Basel I and Basel II The review of Banking Financial Services Vol. 24 No. 7
8. Goldman Sachs Asset Management: 2006): Introduction to MortgageBacked Securities (MBS) and Other Securitized Assets
9. Graff, R., (2006): Securitization Demystified, Journal of Real Estate
Portfolio Management
10. Graffam R., D.,(2000): "A Case Study in International Securitization:
Meeting the Needs of Developing Nations", in Kendall, L. T., M. J. Fishman (eds.), A Primer of Securitization, MIT press paperback edition
11. , . (2009) , National Bank of Greece Serbia,
12. Kendall, L.T.,(2000): "Securitization: A New Era in American Finance",
in Kendall, L.T., M. J. Fishman (eds.), A Primer of Securitization, MIT
press paperback edition,
13. , ., (2009): - ,
Montenegrin Journal of economics No9.
14. Lawrence, J. W. (2004): Mortgage-Backed Securities: Another Way to
Finance Housing, The Joint Congress of UN-HABITAT and the European Federation of Building Societies, Berlin
15. , . (2009):

73

Acta Economica

16. Mayer Brown (2009): Securitization in Serbia: some Legal, Mayer

Brown LLP, Mayer Brown International LLP, and/or JSM. All rights reserved
17. McNamee, M. (2004): Your Mortgage Was His Bond. Business Week,
str.18.
18. , (2008), ,
19. Nomura Securities International, Inc. Two World Financial Center New
York, nomura.com
20. Nouriel Roubini (2007): "The Risk of a U.S. Hard Landing and Implications for the Global Economy and Financial Markets." 13. .
21. Shenker J. C. and Colletta A. J.,(1991): Asset Securitization Evolution:
Current Issues and New Frontiers In Texas Law Review, str.1374.
22. , . (2006): : ,
, , , X, . 1-2.
23. Structured Finance-Glossary of Securitization Terms, Standard & Poors
a Division of The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., New York, str. 26.
,
. (2007): 24.
, ,
58 (7-8)
Yener
Altunbas, Leonardo Gambacorta i David Marques (2007): "Secu25.
ritisation and the Bank Lending Channel", ECB working papers No 838
26. www.bond.com
27. www.nomura.com

74

 336.763

INVESTMENT FUNDS AND COMPANIES AS INSTITUTIONAL

INVESTORS IN FINANCIAL MARKETS
*

.
: .

. ,
, .
.
:
1. ,
2. ,
3. ,
4. .

,
, .

Acta Economica

.
(). . .

.
.
"" . , . . .

( ) .

. .
. : ,
, , , .
: , , , , .

Summary
Investment funds collect and invest funds in different kinds of assets to provide revenues and reduce investment risks. In practice, there are two types of
investment funds: open and closed type of funds.
Open investment funds are a social segment for fund management with continuous change in the number of owners and market price of capital. These
funds acquire their assets by selling their shares, for which they are capable of
at any moment as well as purchasing their issued shares from investors. State
investment funds are also of the open type. Open investment funds can be classified as:
1. asset value increase funds,
2. revenue and growth funds,
3. balanced funds and
4. asset value preservation funds

76

Closed investment funds have a fixed number of issued shares which are initially sold in a financial market. Share selling is performed through public offering
(tenders). As a rule, these funds do not purchase issued shares from their shareholders. Issued shares can be traded in a secondary market through a stock exchange.
Financial companies act as mediators in financial markets. They sell their
shares and thus generate the capital and assets aimed for further investing. Investment companies are also called a 'supermarket' for investment funds. These
companies possess the shares of several funds, have their own portfolio and
management. In financial markets, investment companies are called liquid investment funds. They are more of a closed then open type of funds.
In capital markets, investment companies invest in shares (common and preferential ones), bonds and collateralized mortgage obligations.
Investment aims of companies are dependent on investment aims of funds.
These aims are outlined in funds' catalogues and are taken over by the companies. Investment companies must be organized in a way which makes sure they
are capable of performing the assigned function. They must have certain organizational structure such as: assembly, board of directors, investment consultants, distribution and selling network and certain type of employees.
Key words: investment fund, investment company, open fund, closed fund,
financial and capital market.

.
. () e .
.
.
.
.
, . je

, , 77

Acta Economica

,
.

1.
2006.
1. .
. , ,
,
, .

. ,
, . , , :
, .2
1.1.

, . , .

200.000 ,
200.000 .
. .
, .
.
1
2

78

" ", 36/06.

19 42, , " " 36/06.

. ,
2006. ,
3
:
1. , 75%
. , , ;
2. , 75%

(, , , , -
);
3. , 85%
;
4. , 75% : ,
, ,
,
.

, . , . . ,
.
,

.
4
:
3

, : , , , 2003, . 222. " ",

, 2006.
4
, : , , , 2003, . 222.

79

Acta Economica

) , , ,
) ,
, ,
) ,
) ,
) ,
)
.

.

.

. .
know hw (
) .
.


.
( 7 ).
().
. .

.
.
, .
, . 80

,
.

, , .
(. ). .
1.2.
(closed-end funds, , investment trusts ) .
(public stocks offerings).
().

.
,
.

5
, :
1. 50%
,
2. 50%
.
,
3.
60% .

().

. 5

" ", 2006.

81

Acta Economica

-, . -
. ,
.
.
""
, .
6
:
1. (
),
2. ,
3. .
. () .
.
1: 7

8
:
6

, , , : , , , 2009, . 124.
7
, : - , , , 2006, . 271.
8
: , ,
"", , 2007. . 242.

82

(NAV)
NAV

. ,
,
.

2.
.
, .
. "" .
. , .
9
:
) ,
) ,
) ,
) ,
) .
9

, , , : , , , 2009, . 128.

83

Acta Economica

(liquid assets funds).
,
.
, . , 2005. 2.000 .
, 90
.
, .
.

10
:
2:

,
, .

( ), (, ,
) .
(, , , ).

3.

.
10

, , , : ,
, , 2006, . 459.

84

. -,
1940. . 1980-1990. 12 .

.
11
:
1.
.
,
,
2. ( ) , ,
3. .
. .
. , 90 120
, .

. .

( ), (, ) .
(, ,
).

. .
( )
( ).
, , . , . 11

Frederick S. Mishkin: , "", , 2005, . 219.

85

Acta Economica

12
:
1. . .
, ,
2.
,
3. ,
4. , ,
5. . ,
6. . 65% ,
,
7. ,
8. .
,
. ,
.
,
9. , , ,
.,
10. . , ,
11.
.
.
12

, , , : ,
, , 2006, . 466.

86

12.

13.
14.
15.

.

. ,
, .

. ,

,
,
.

4.
, .
3: 13

13

, : , , , 2003, . 225.

87

Acta Economica

14
:
)
,
)
,
) . , ,
.
. ,
: , , , .,
) . , , ( ,
, , , .),
)
() .
.
, , , , , . , .
-
, . "" . . , . . .
, ,
.
, , 15
- . 14

, : , .. . 224.
,
.
15

88

.
, . . , .
.


.
. , .

.
.
. . , .

5.

. , . . , . , .
, . ,

89

Acta Economica

.
16
:
1.
: 1) , 2) 3)
.
.
2.
. . ( , , ). ,
. ,
( ).
3.
.
,
,
,
, .
4.
. .
5. , ,
.
6. , , , ,
. , .
, .
7. , , , 16

, , , : , , , 2009, . . . 124.

90

8.

9.
10.
11.

. ( , ,
). . ,
, ,
.
.
: , , ,
,
, .

, ,
.
,
.
, .

,
.

, ,
. .
. .

.
"" , .
.
91

Acta Economica

,
.
, , . , , (, ). ,
, . ,

,
( ) . , .
.

1. , : , ,
, 2007.
2. , : , , , 2002.
3. , : , , ,
2003.
4. Faley J. Bernard: Capital Markets, MacMillan education Ltd, London,
UK, 2001.
5. Horne C. Van James: Financial Management and Policy, Prentice Hall,
Inc. New York, 1996.
6. , :
, , , 2007.
7. , ; , :
, , , 2009.
8. Le Roy and Van Hoose David: Modern money and banking, 3-th edition,
Copyright, 1993, , , 2001.

92

9. , : , ,
, , 2007.
10. , : : ,
, , , 1996.
11. Mishkin S. Frederic: , , , 2005.
12. Mobius Mark: Mutual funds-an introduction to the core concepts, John
Wiley & Sons, 2007.
13. , : , , , 1994.
14. , : ( ),
, , 1990.
15. , :
, , , 2006.
16. , ; , : ,
, .. , , , 2003.
17. , ; , : ,
.. , , , 2009.
18. , :
( ), , , 2000.
19. , ; , : , , , 1997.
20. (" , 36/06).
21. , ; , : , , , 2006.

93

 659.3/.4 (497.6)

THE ANALYZE OF CURRENT LEVEL OF USE OF PUBLIC

RELATIONS IN INSTITUTIONS OF BOSNIA AND
HERZEGOVINA
*

:

, "" . , ,

. ,
, , .
: , ,
.

Acta Economica

Summary
Intensive development of public relations in Bosnia and Herzegovina started
in second half of last decade of twentieth century when under the influence of
international community occurred "replanting" of this management function
from their states into mentioned area. In practic, effort, knowledge and money
for needs of use of public relations in institutions did not give desired results.
The main goal of this work is to present analyze of current level of use of public relations in institutions, as well as to define activities that are necessary to
be realized in near future in order to have mentioned managerial function functional in accordance with world standards.
Key words: Public relations; Institutions; Communication and Aimed public.

, , , , , , , .
, , . ,

.
(. Public Relations PR) .1
, . ,
(. Integrated Marketing Communications
IMC)2, , ,
.3
1

Frank Jefkins "Public Relations Techniques", Second Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, 1994.p.7
2
, , . : Kotler P.,
Armstrong G., Saunders J., Wong V., "Principles of Marketing", Second European Edition, Prentice Hall Europe, 1999. p. 781.
3
Yeshin Tony "Integrated Marketing Communications", Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK,
1998. p. 250.

96

,
, , (,
), . . ,
() ,
, () ,
, , .

, .
,
, ( ).
.
. , ,
,
, , , , , , , , .

1.
, . ,

, .
, .
, , . , , .
1908. ,
()
,
. ,
1923. ,
" ", 97

Acta Economica

. , .
, - . ,
.
, . ,
, , .
, ,
. , , .
1.2.
,
, ,
,
.
,
, . , ,
. ,
.
XIV
, 1984. , (Press-servis)
, - . .
, , ,
,
.

98

, .
, , . ,
, , , 2004. . " ,
"
" 2004. , ,
,
() . , "Web" ."4
:
? , .

2.

: ,
. , . ,
,
( ),
.

. , ,
( , ), ,
.
4

" ", - ,
, 2004, . 46.

99

Acta Economica

, , ,
, .

, . , " "
( ), , . .
,
, .
. ,
, . ,
, , .
. " 2008. , 31,45 %
30. 2008. , ."5 , . , -
.
.
.
,
.
, .
, : ,
5

100

www.parco.gov.ba (12.02.2009. ) " 2008. "

. ,
. , , .

3.
, 01.04.2009. 01.07.2009. .
, , .
. , , ,
.
1: , 6

23

17

,
.
,
.
, . ,
73,92 % , 26,08 % .

: .

101

Actaa Economica

2:

7
26,08%
%
73,92%
%

,


,
,

. ,

.
3.1.
3

, ,
..

"""
,

. ,
..

65 %
, 35 % ,

,
.

,

. ,

,


,

"
".

102

: .

,


,
(IQ).




.

41 50
, . 28 % (

3), 51
65 ., 18 %,

,

3:

2
27%

28%

2
2030.
3
3140.
4
4150.

1
18%

2
27%

5
5165.

(93%
),

(6% ). -

992%
(
25%
% , 2% ),

81
8 %

(9 % , 1 %
).9
,

,


.


47,05
4
%, 29,41 %,,

: .
"
: ", ,
, ,
www
w.ekof.ac.yu, 16.122.2007..
9

1003

Acta Economica

11,76 %, .
,
. ( ),
,

.
(
), ,
, - .
,
,
.
(59 %
), ,

. 4 10 , , 35 % .
3.2. -
, , ,
.

, , .
65%
(
), 35% 10% .

104

,
,
. , . ,
,
.
3.3.
( -) , .
,
.
, ,
( ), .
, , ,
,
.
, , .
, ,
.
, : - . 41% ( 4) ,
53% , 6%
,
.
105

Actaa Economica

4:

10
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

53%
41%
%
6%

2004. ,

, 34 , 20,559 %
(

), 23,53% ,
5,88 %

, 50%

11
.
5:

12

2004.
2009.

20,59
9%
23,53
3%
5,88%
41%
53%
%
0%

50
0%
6%
%

5,

2004. 2009.
,

.
10

: .
-
, , , 2004. . 12..
12
: .
11

106

,
,
: , ,
,
, , . ,
,
,
( 2000. ).
, ,
: ,
, .

, , : ,
.
, ,
.
6:
13
,,
.
,

- ,,
.
-

.
.
.

, (
)
. 13

: .

107

Acta Economica

, .

,
.
, . . ,
. 14 , ,
, .
, ,
. ,
.
( )
, , . 2002. , . , ,
, . 2001.
.

,
. ,
, .

14

108

7., " ", , 2004.

16 .15 .
, , .
,
, , :
" " " ". " "
12
(ITB-Berlin).16
3.4.
, ( ) , . ,
: , , ,
.

, .
, (, , , .)
, .
, 86,67%
,
( 79,99%
), ( 53,33%), () ( 50%),
( 53,33%), (
44,45%) , , (
15

" ", : " 27 , 62",

, 26.08.2009.
16
, 9. 15. ,
. , , 94 39 , " ", 12 ,
2009.

109

Acta Economica

53,33%).
. , ,
, .
3.4.1.

, , . , .
,
.

, , ,

.

, ,

.
, ,
, . ,
, , . 47% , 35% ,
18% .

, , .
, ,
, ,
, .
110

.
,
, . , ,
,
( 84,61%
), "Web" ( 74,99% ),
( 61,53% ), ( 53,84% ), , , "e-mail"
, , "press
kit", ,
, .
3.4.2. ,
:
, , .
. ,
,
, .
, .
,
,
, ,

( - ).
,
. , , .
,
111

Actaa Economica

,

,

, .


,
47%
%
,

, 53%

.

, ,


.

,


.
3.4.3.
3

,
.

,
.



,

,

.

35 %

(
, ), 65 %

.

7:

17
0%
35%

65
5%

,
17

112

: .

,

,
.
3.5.

,

,

.
,

, .

.

,

.
76%
% ,

,


,
24%
..
,

, ad hoc,
,

,
. 82%
,


,

18%,
,



.

8:

18
18%

0%

82%

18

1113

Actaa Economica

19,

, (
)



.
,

, 0,87%

()


, 16,1%



, 56,49%

26,54%
%

( 9), 94%
,

4,21 (
1- ; 5--

), 6%

,

3,00.
3


,

9:

20
94%

0%

6%

,
19

,

, 01.04.2009.
01.07
7.2009. .

20 655 . ,


,

: , "e-maill"-a

.


. ,

1062
.

20
: .

114

()
.
. ,
,

.
,
, , , .
, ,
. , ,
,
.
, ,

.

,
,
.


.
.
.
,
, , .

, .21
21

Paper in the proceedings: Barat, T.: "What does Public Relations Mean in Europ?", in: Public
Relations World Congress 2000., "Building Our Talent in a World of Tough Issues",
www.prsa.org, 2000.

115

Acta Economica

,
.
,
, , .
,
, ( ),
,

, .
,
, :
,
,
.


, .
,
, . ,
.

,
. :
,
,
,

. ,

.
,
,
. ,
, . , 116

, .
, ,
.

1. , . .; ..; ..; ..: , , , 2006.

2. , .: ,
, , 1999.
3. Blek, Sem: , Clio, , 2003.
4. , .; , .; , .: , ,
, 2001.
5. Kotler, Philip; : , 4. ,
, , , 2006.
6. , : , , , 2003.
7. , .: : ,
, , , ,
, , , 2003.
8. Yeshin, Tony: Integrated Marketing Communications, ButterworthHeinemann, Oxford, UK, 1998.
9. Jefkins, Frank: Public Relations Techniques, Second Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, 1994.
10. ,
- , , 2004.
11. , : ,
, , 2003.
12. ( 7.),
, 2004.
13. " ", : " 27 ,
62", , 26. 08. 2009.
14. : , ,
, , www.ekof.bg.ac.yu (16. 12. 2007.)
15. Paper in the proceedings: Barat, T.: "What does Public Relations Mean
in Europ?", in: Public Relations World Congress 2000., "Building Our
Talent in a World of Tough Issues", www.prsa.org, 2000.
16. 2008. , www.parco.gov.ba
(12.02.2009..).
117

Acta Economica

17. , : , , , 2004.
18. , : , , , 1997.
19. Kitchen, P. J.: Public relations in the promotional mix: a three-phase
analysis, Marketing Intelligence & Planning, Vol. 14., No. 2., MCB
University Press, 1996.
20. Katlip, S.M.; Senter, A.H.; Braum, G.M.: ,
, , 2006.
21. , .; , .; , .; , .: , , , 2004.
22. Public relation vs. Srbija, , : Speed magazin,
www.speed.com, 06. 07. 2007.
23. Paper in the proceedings: Barat, T.: What does Public Relations Mean in
Europ?, in: Public Relations World Congress 2000: Building Our Talent
in a World of Tough Issues, www.prsa.org, 2000.

118

 347.776

THE PENALTIES FOR MONOPOLY BEHAVIOR CARTELS

*

:
.
, .

( ),
. ,
,
.
, . . ,
, .

, , . ,

Acta Economica

: , , ,
.

Summary
Determining penalties for cartels and cartel behaviour is one of thr most important things that antitrust authorites has been engaged in world wide. Just a
number of executed processing and fines in the last few years is growing,
which clearly confirms firm position of the antitrust authorities to end antitrust
behaviour. There has been a debate between antitrust authorities and academics
about determination of appropriate punishment (and other sanctions) which are
necessary to prevent antitrust behaviour. Therefore, the aim is to focus to the
penalties as well as making performance of more detalied analysis of all the
questions that are associated whith the adoped principles and methodology of
different antitrust authorities related to determining penalties and sanctions. We
can conclude that the aim of modern antitrust authoriries is focusing to fines in
relation to other kinds of sanctions. In addition there is also the fact that almost
all antitrust authorities in the wored apply fines as the main and the only sanction. Other kinds of sanctions, like prison or disqualification are applied by
just a small group of antitrust authorities.

Key words: antitrust authorities, cartels, competitive policy, fines (assessments).

1.

, .
, ,
. ,
80% .
( )
.
.
(),
.

120

.
( )
.
,
. ,
.
.

, .
,
.
, ,
,
, .

,
,
.
,
,
.
:
1. "" ?
2. ?
3. ?
4.
, ?
1.1. ""

(121

Acta Economica

, ,
, .).
,
"" , .
, ,
.
1.2.
, , . .
, ,
1.

: 1/2003 .

.
, 1996. 2.
1.3.
. . : , , , , , , , .
.
, -

2007. , .
2
, 1947. , 1980.
.

122

( ).

, : , , , , . ( ).
,
,
.
, "" ,
. , .
:
, , . .
.
, .
1.4. ""

,
. , , .
( , , , , )
. : , ,
, , , , . ,
.
,
,
. ,
.
123

Acta Economica

, .


.
480 (Thyssen Krupp ).
,
, 500
( 342 ) Hoffmann La Roche , . : 48 ( 32 );
2400 ( 15 ); 113
( 82 ).
,
. :
, , (
), ,
.
(, ,
, .). , (
) 3.

2.
2.1.
" " . , ,
.
. , :
, ,
3

: International Competition Network, Report to the 7th ICN Annual Conference,

Kyoto, april 2008.

124

.

,
. .
()

. , 4.
,
, .
,
.
, 1
10% . ,
, , .


.

, . .
2.2.

.
()
, 4

125

Acta Economica

. , ( ) , 10
16 .
, .
, .


.
1 50%
.

3.

.
(, , ). ,
.
,
. , "hard-core"
, . , . ,
. ( ), (
; ),
.
3.1.

/ . . -

126

, . , .
, ,
. , , .
, .
3.2.
( ).
( ) .
. , , .

(0,5-3%; 3-7%; 7-10%), (
, ).
. , .
, 1.500.000 .
, 20%
.
, :
;
; .
, , , . 15% 30%
.
.

127

Acta Economica

4.
.
.
4.1.
. .
.
,
(). , .
.
. ,
. ,
5
.
, .
- ,
10 .
. .
. 0 2,
. , 1,5.
, 10%,
. , ,
50%.
.
, . . 50%.
.
.
. , 450.000 , 1% . 128

( , , , , , , , , .). - , . ( , ,
, , .) .
.
:

, (, ).
" ".

: , .

, .
" , ,
".
4.2.
.
5 . 12 . ,
.
,
, .

(Leniency programme).
.
. ,
5

129

Acta Economica

, , .
,

. , .
. , , , , , , , . , . ,
,
.
. ,
, , .
" ". " " .
. . .
.
,
.
.
:

.
. " " .
, , , (
) .

, .

130

, , 6.
. 1:

: International Competition Network, Report to the 7th ICN Annual Conference, Kyoto,
april 2008.

: International Competition Network, Report to the 7th ICN Annual Conference,

Kyoto, april 2008.

131

Acta Economica

. 2:

: International Competition Network, Report to the 7th ICN Annual Conference, Kyoto,
april 2008.

4.3.
,
.
. : , , . , .
, .
7
8

132

.
.

, .
.
.
. ,
.
- ,
.
,
.
,
, .
. , , .
, , ,
, .

5. ( / )

. : , ,
, , .
5.1.
)

.
, (:
10 ; : 500 ; :
1.500.000 ).
,
. :
133

Acta Economica

, , , : 10%
.
: 10% .
: 10% .
,

, , . (
). -
. ,

,
.

,
, . ,
.
,
. 5%
. 1/15
.
-,
100.000.000 $. ,
,
. .
. , ,
750.000 10% (
) .
,
100.000 .
, 10% ,
2000 . :
134

10%
10.000.000 ; 4.000.000
10% ; 450.000 10%
; 100.000.000 $
.

. , ,
, , , , .
,
10% 15% . (: 10
; : 4 .).
(: 1.000.000 ; : 200
; : 500.000$; :
60.718 ).
, (: 70.000 ; : 5 ).
)

.
:
,
:
5000$
90 ; 300.000 , 1% .
:
425700$; 5000 , 2 ; 3000
6 ; 250.000$, 5 .
: 50.000
, / 5 ;
1% 135

Acta Economica

; 250.000$,
20 ( ).
, :
3000 ,
6 ; 100.000 .
5.2.
,
. 1% ,
, , , .
5 .
10.000 .
50.000 .
5.3.

.
.
, , , ,
, , , . ( )
, , .
(, , ) 4 , 3 10 .
, , .
.
5.4.
: 480.000.000
Thyssen Krupp 500.000.000$ F. Hoffmann-La Roche.
:

( 200.000.000 250.000.000
136

), (, , ) 5.000.000 21.000.000 .

200.000.000 , 36.000.000 ( 3.300.000 ).
- ,
2.400 ( 22.500.000 ), 113 ( 120.000.000
) 3.600.000 $ (
3.000.000 ).
, ,
.
. 3:

:10%
/
()
.

1%

::30%

.:10
15%
.:6000 128000000
6000000
.
::5

:12.5

::
10.:

5
:48

:10%

10000000
.

:10% 479669850(
ThyssenKrupp
( )
).

::10%

(
). 256(
750000 )
.
::75000
/4.

SiemensAG:
126588000
(

137

Acta Economica

:
5

::100
00010%
.:1 /

:10% 5319000000
.

::5
(21276000)
.

::
410%
15000
.:
,
/ 30000
.

:10% 117

.

:10%
:1
.

::3

:
/5
.:500
10000
.

1%
:5%


1000 50000

:10%

2000 113
. KTCorp(2005)
:3200

::
1500000
.:30000
.

:450000
:10% 14,8
TMobile;3,5
. SEP
;450000
defacto.

:
:$500000.:
$10000000 $100000
10%
.

:10%

/
.

138

:2400

:
640

36881250
(2002)

:1/10 ::
1/15

.
.:20000
:
.(.565)1/25
17000.

(480) .

1% :10%

10%

.
/
:
60718.

:10%
17

GSM
.

::
:$100000000

.
::
$1000000

,10.

F.HoffmannLaRoche:
ShermanAntitrustAct,
$500,
(1999)

: International Competition Network, Report to the 7th ICN Annual Conference, Kyoto,
april 2008.

, . , , .
, , .
: ,
. , (. ).
,
, ,
/
/ "" .
139

Acta Economica

1. Daniel Slottje, Measuring Market Power (Contributions to Economic

Analysis), North Holland, 20 Nov 2002.
2. Don E. Waldman and Elizabeth J. Jensen, Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice, Addison Wesley, august 4. 2006.
3. Jhon Lipczynski, J. J. Wilson and John Goddard, Industrial Organization: Compettion, Strategy, Policy, Financial Times / Prentice Hall, New
Jersey, 23 Jun 2005.
4. K. Aiginger and J. Finsinger, Applied Industrial Organization: Towards a
Theory-Based Empirical Industrial Organization, Springer, november 4.
2007.
5. Lynn Pepall, Dan Richards and George Horman, Industrial Organization:
Contemporary Theory and Empirical Applications, Wiley Blackwell,
january 18. 2008.
6. Mark Armstrong and Robert M. Porter, Handbook of Industrial Organization, North Holland, october 5. 2007.
7. Mariana Mazzucato, Firm Size, Innovation and Market Structure: The
Evolution of Industry Concentration and Stability (New Horizons in the
Economics of Innovation), Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, Northampton,
23 Aug 2000.
8. M. A. Utton, Market Dominance and Antitrust Policy, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd, Northampton, 27 April 2005.
9. , , , ,
2001.
10. Thomas Brenner, Local Industrial Clusters: Existence, Emergence and
Evolution (Studies in Global Competition), Routledge, London, 18
March 2004.
:
1. International Competition Network, Report to the 7th ICN Annual

Conference, Kyoto, april 2008.

:
1. INTERNATIONAL COMPETITION NETWORK (ICN) - http://www.internationalcompetitionnetwork.org/
2. EFTA SURVEILLANCE AUTHORITY - http://www.eftasurv.int/
3. EU OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF COMPETITION http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition
4. US DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANTITRUST DIVISION - http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/
140

 347.27:339.13

SUBPRIME
,

THE SUBPRIME MORTGAGE LOANS AS AN INITIATOR TO

ACCELERATE THE EMERGENCE OF CREDIT MORTGAGE
CRISIS
*

:
"subprime"
, ,
.

.
2007. ,
.
,
subprime
"" subprime
a , .

, , , .

Acta Economica

: subprime , , , .

Summary:
The working paper analyzes the "subprime" mortgage loans as instability
accelerators in the mortgage market, with regard to transmission of disorders
from the real estate market to credit markets and financial sector. In a research
also analyzes the historical review of the crisis in the real estate market and amnesia of financial regulators to learn from previous losses. Some of the causes
of instability have been created from variability of house prices and residential
investment in the period up to August 2007. , and a some of the reasons we find
in a deficiencies of the credit mechanism. Following the above paragraph in the
paper, we tried to explain the structure of the mortgage market, the percentage
of approval of subprime mortgage loans and try to prove that the subprime
mortgage accelerator loan was occurrence of mortgage crisis, which rapidly
transferred to the financial markets in USA, and througout the world economies
and even in Serbian economy.
Key word: subprime mortgage loans, real estate market, mortgage crisis, financial crisis.

, () ,

. Subprime . , 2001.
, .
subprime
,
, .
,
, . ,
,
142

subprime
,

. ,
subprime , , .

1.
,
, (1985-1991)
(1991 - 1999). ,
, .
1.1. (1985 1991)
,
736 1065 , ,
1
.
,
. , , . , .
.
, . , ,
.
, , , 1

, . (1999), , , . 25-35.

143

Acta Economica

,
.
,
2
.
,
2/3 1981. 100 . ,
,
.
,
: ""
. .
,

.


.
, , . ,
, , .
1.2. (1991 - 1999)
1990. . , 1990. ,

. ,
"".
"" ,
2

Herring, J, Richard (1998), Banking disaster: Causes and preventive measures, some explanation from recent US experience, World Bank, Economic Development Institute p.p 3-15.

144

subprime
,

,
. , ""
.
"" ,
.
3
.
,
, . .
,
,
. :

,
.
.
"subprime" 2007. . , subprime

.

2.
2007.
() OFHEO Office of Federal
4
Housing Enterprise Oversight , 2007. . , 2001 - 2006.
6,5%,
2007. 3,2%.
3

Goodhart, C. Hartmann, P, Llewellyn, D. Rohas-Suarez, L. and Weisbord, S. (2001), Financial

regulation: why, how and where now?, Routledge, London (UK), p.p 124-125.
4
: Economic Report to the President, (2008), p.20.

145

Acta Economica
5

1: 20000-2008.

1





2006. . ,

.

2006.
, 2008. ,
200%

(

,,
.
6
,

(2005 - 2008. ), ,

(
) .

(lock-in
n-effect), .

. ,

.



,

(
, , , .) 2006. 2007. , 40%

2005. .
5

: S&P/Case-Schhiller index price off housing, 2000.-20008.,

http:///www.standardandppoors.com.
6
: Ferreira, F,
F Gyourko, J, Traccy, J. (2008), "Houusing Boost and Household Mobility", National bureau off economic research,, working papers Noo. 14310

146

subprime
,

1%
2006. . , ,
7
. , ,

8
.

3.
, .

, ,
. ,
, : (1) -
, (2) - , ,
, ,
, , (3)
. ,

.

: ) ,
) ,
. ,
. "" ""
.
7

: Taylor, J, B. (2007), "Housing and Monetary Policy", National bureau of economic research, working papers No. 13682.
8
( , .).

147

Acta Economica

, ,
.
9
.
2001. 2007.
.
5%, 2001. 10
, 20% 2006. . , ()
(),
. ,
( )
. . ,
.

"subprime" (, ,
11
2007) . , : ,
- (alternative A) "subprime".
"subprime"
"NINJA" () . , , 9

Fannie Mae i Freddie Mac

() (National Mortgage Association) . Fannie Mae i Freddie Mac , . , , " " ( , ) . , ,
. , , .
10
: Economic Report to the President, (2008), p. 53.
11
: Gerardi, K, Shapiro A. H, Willen, P, S. (2007), "Subprime Outcomes: Risky Mortgages, Homeownership Experiences and Foreclosures", Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Working
Papers No. 07-15.

148

subprime
,

( "No Income, No Job, No Assets"). "subprime"

.
/
12
"NINJA" , "subprime"
- . "Subprime", -, , , . ( , loan to
value) (87% - 95%). ,
"subprime"
(. "no-doc" ).
.

"subprime" .
() - , "subprime"
.
"subprime" 1993,
. , "subprime"
300 , , , , "subprime"
13
.

14
. , (: ) ,
1,6 "subprime" 18 ,

12

() .
13
. , . "".
14
: Gerardi, K, Shapiro A. H, Willen, P, S. (2007), "Subprime Outcomes: Risky
Mortgages, Homeownership Experiences and Foreclosures", Federal Reserve Bank of Boston
Working Papers No. 07-15.

149

Acta Economica
15

(, probability of default) (18%

3%).
, . ,
- ,
, "subprime" . 44%
"subprime"
, .
"subprime"
, .

.
16
(, 2008) , (2007)
. "" ""
, "" ( / ). , . , (2007) ,
, - . (2007) (duration)

. , (i) ,
.
,
"subprime" 1998.
6%. "Duration"
15

,
. . Special Purpose Vehicles, offshore , de facto
(foreclosure).
16
: Roubini, N. (2008), "The Current U.S. Recession and the Risks of a Systemic Financial Crisis", New York University, p.p 2-21.

150

subprime
,

"subprime" 2000/01. . ,

( 1.3.1). 2000/01.
"subprime" .
, (2007) "subprime" .
"subprime" .
,

, .
17
. . -.
2001. , "",
, .
.
,
.
, . ()
,
. , , .

. , (deliquencies) . 17

() . , (.
"" ), ,
. , .

151

Acta Economica

, . , . , .
. ,
, . ,
,
(subprime), .
( )
2006. , 3.1.1.
3.1.1: ( 90 )

3.1.1
,
"subprime " 2004. 2008. ,
. "Subprime" 2005 - 2006. , 2007.
18
20% .
18

152

: Economic Report to the President, (2008), p. 58.

subprime
,

, () , / , 19
, .
2008. 2009. 1,8

. ,
, () .
()
,
. 20
( -
" ")
, .

, . 21
.
,
. () (Government Sponzored Enterprise GSEs) Fannie Mae i Freddie Mac
417 000$. 2007. , 19

"" ,
.
20
2001. 2007. ( "housing bubble") , , .
21
, , . , 2006. (West Coast)
300 000$ 170 000$ (Mid East).
775 000$, , 375 000$. . /
, , , .

153

Acta Economica

, . "jumbo"
22
.

4. 2007.
2007. , , . , , . (Northern Rock London UK),
.
, (U.S Treasury bond), " " (flight to quality),

.

. , .
4.1
subprime
. subprime , .
4.1.1 subprime ,
"subprime" .
4.1.1 23
2001-2006. ( ) :
22

GSE "Government Sponzored Enterprise" () , Fannie Mae i Freddie Mac.

23
: Gerardi, K, Shapiro A. H, Willen, P, S. (2007), "Subprime Outcomes: Risky Mortgages, Homeownership Experiences and Foreclosures", Federal Reserve Bank of Boston Working
Papers No 07-15.

154

 subprime
,

Subprime

2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006

. %

190
87
46
231
123 53
335
195 58
540
363 67
625
465 74
600
449 75

**

. % . %

60
11
19
430
142 33
68
54
79
576
172 30
85
74
87
655
238 36
200
159 79
515
233 45
380
332 87
570
281 49
400
366 91
480
219 46

. %

1.433
1.088 76
1.898
1.442 76
2.690
2.131 79
1.345
1.019 76
1.180
965 82
1.040
905 87

** 417 000 $ , .

4.1.1
2005. , 2006. 2005. ,
- .
.
- 2003. . 2004. .
,
- "subprime" .
2003. 2006. :
2003. 3,77
11% "subprime" -,
2,64 70% .
2006. 2,52
40% "subprime" -,
1,94 77% .
, . 2007. , , Fannie
Mae i Freddie Mac 2007. . .
.
,
,
. , ,
.
"" ,
()
Fannie Mae i Freddie Mac.
155

Acta Economica

" " (flight to quality)

,
(U.S Treasury).

,
.
. , -.
4.1.2: () 24.

4.1.2 ,
2007. . 4.1.2 " "
. 4.1.2 2007. 0,5%. ,
,
3%. "
" (flight to quality) -
.
24

156

: Economic Report to the President, (2008), p.62.

subprime
,

, , , .

. ( ).
. , . , ,

, , . , , , , .

, . ,
, .
: ( )
,
.
, .
, (Washington Mutual, Wachovia, Lehman
Brothers). , ,
. , ()
, , .
; - -. ()
( 25),
25

- ; 2007. 4.75%, 2010. 0.25%.

157

Acta Economica

" " . - 26. " "

( ). "HOPE
NOW" . "" (Bear Stearns, Fannie and Freddie, AIG), "" 700
, 800 27. ,
-
, 2010. . ( 1500
) , 28
-
.
( credit default swaps)
. " " (too big too fail), .
26

- (Term auction
facility) , (Term
Securities Lending Facility) - , , 28 , (Primary Dealer Credit Facility)
( , ) - . , , ,
( )...
27
(US Treasury) je o
"" (Troubled Asset Relief Plan), ,
. .
28
,
. ,
, .
.

158

subprime
,

.
.
. , 40
( ).
, ,
. , 2009. . -
" " -20 2009. .
29,
.
,
.
, , ,
.
.
.

:
1) ,
.
2) .
3)
4) .
,
.

.
29

-, - ,
, , .

159

Acta Economica

.
. ,
greenfield , ,
.

5.
2007.
je . :
, . ,
.
, , . , .
,
2007. . . . .
.
.
subprime ""
2007. ,
,
. , , ;
,
(default) . ,
.
160

subprime
,

.
,
. , , .
, .
, . , , . ,
(
).
, . . , ,
, . ,
, ,
.
, ,
,
subprime ,
.

1. Brunnermeier, K. Markus (2009), Deciphering the liquidity and credit

crunch, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23 (1)
2. Chart Series Name: http://www.economagic.com
3. Dow Jones Industrial Average 2001-2010, http://www.quotemedia.com
4. Dow Jones Europe Stoxx Banks Index vs. FTSE 100 Index,
http://www.bloomberg.com
5. Economic report to the president, Annual report (2008)
6. Fannie Mae Case-GS, http://www.mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pdf/2003-10070
161

Acta Economica

7. Federal Reserve System, http://www.federalreserve.gov

8. Feldstein, S. M, (2007), Housing, Credit markets and the business cycle,
National bureau of economic research, working paper No. 13471, 1050
Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge.
9. Ferreira, F, Gyourko, J, Tracy, J. (2008), Houising boosts and household
mobility, National bureau of economic research, working paper No.
14310, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge
10. Financial Times Report, october (2008), http://www.ft.com/globalfinancecrisis/josefstiglitz/2008.html.
11. Gerardi, K, Shapiro, A, H, Willen, S, P. (2008), Subprime outcomes:
Risky mortgages, homeownership experiences, and foreclosures, Federal
Reserves of Boston, Working papers No. 07-15
12. Julliard, C, Brunnemeier K.M. (2006) Money illusions and housing frenzies, National bureau of economic research, working paper No. 12810,
1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge
13. " ",
(2010), , .20, -,
14. Mishkin, S.F. (2006) Monetarna ekonomija, bankarstvo i finansijska trita, sedmo izdanje, Columbia University, Data status Beograd
15. NASDAQ, 2000-2009. godine, http://www.stockcharts.com
16. Roubini, N. (2008), The current U.S Recession and the risks of a systematic finacial crisis, New York University, Written Testimony for the
House of RepresentativesFinancial Services Committee Hearing on February 26th, 2008
17. S&P/Case-Schiller index price of housing, 2000.-2008., http://www.standardandpoors.com
18. Tobias, A. Hyun Song Shin (2009), Liquidity and leverage, Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Reports, 327, January
19. Taylor, J. B, (2007), Housing and Monetary policy, National bureau of
economic research, working paper No. 13682, 1050 Massachusetts Avenue Cambridge
20. , ,
"Acta Economica"
21. Welch, J,S, (2008), "Subprime mortgage crisis 2008",
http://www.scribd.com/doc/7469179/Subprime-Mortgage-Crisis-2008
22. www.nbs.rs
23. www.imf.org
24. www.mfin.sr.gov.rs
25. www.ft.com
162

 338.124.4:338.242.2

THE EURO AND CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS

*

.
()

. 1999.
, .
,
.
.
,
,
.
,
.
: , , , , .

, "DWFM Beckman Solicitors"

Acta Economica

Summary
This article discusses the issues related to the European single currency in
the context of the current global financial crisis. The paper gives an overview
on the process and strategy for transition to the European Monetary Union
(EMU) and discusses expected benefits and costs of the formation of the EMU.
Since its launch in 1999 the euro has contributed to macroeconomic stability
within the euro zone and produces clear benefits for companies, financial institutions and ordinary citizens. It is evident that the performance of the euro has
been a success for the first ten years, but it is now faced with challenges owing
to the current financial crisis. The present crisis shows that the weaknesses in
the control and crisis management competence of the euro zone are affecting
fiscal and financial stability in the EMU. The crisis in Greece, which mismanaged its economy and misled other the euro members about its true budget
figures, has had an impact on the euro zone as a whole. Although the euro provides stability to the EMU members, there are doubts about the ability of the
euro zone to respond to current financial problems.
Key words: the euro, current financial crisis, the European Monetary Union,
Greece, budget deficit.

INTRODUCTION
The introduction of a single currency called the euro represents a significant
financial development and a big step towards the integration of the European
single market.
In early 1990s, the idea of European monetary integration became popular
among EU member countries and as a result, two monetary programs were
proposed, the Werner Plan and the Delors Report. The EU member countries
officially agreed to implement the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) under the Maastricht Treaty signed in 1992 (Zestos, 2006).
The process and strategy for transition to monetary union adopted by the
Maastricht Summit involves a gradual transition to the euro through three stages. European countries can only become part of the currency union at the final
stage if they satisfy six "convergence criteria" of which the most important are
annual government borrowing (budget deficit) below 3 percent of GDP and national debt below 60 percent of GDP. On 1 January 1999, eleven countries of
the European Union adopted the single currency for Europe. These eleven
countries were Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy,
Luxembourg, Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. Three other members of the EU
Denmark, Sweden and the UK did not join the euro, while Greece did not
join the first wave until it satisfied the preconditions for monetary union in
164

2001 (Resnick, 2001). In 2007 Slovenia joined the euro area, Malta and Cyprus
likewise in 2008, while Slovakia entered in 2009.
There is strong debate over whether the Maastricht convergence criteria
(budget deficit below 3%) was applied strictly or favourably for Italy, Greece,
Portugal and Spain when admitting them to the euro club. Although in the beginning of 1997 German economists forecasted the possibility of the euros
failure and called for the postponing of the start of the implementation of EMU,
by March 1998 Italy, Portugal and Spain had qualified for EMU. The suggestion by these economists that the single currency may be degraded through
large budget deficits in these countries has proved groundless. Greece was accused of falsifying its reported deficit data to gain membership to the EMU in
2001 (Patterson, 2006).
Monetary policy is conducted by the European Central Bank (ECB) based
in Frankfurt. ECB is established by the Maastricht Treaty as an independent institution which is legally obligated to conduct its monetary policy without being subject to political pressure from any member countries.
The euro as a dominant regional currency became the second most important
currency after the US dollar. Its influence now extends far beyond European borders, but it still has far to go to rival the US dollar in international monetary affairs.
The euro zone countries represent the largest economically integrated group
of countries. With a population of 330 million, it constitutes 20 percent of the
global economy (Ferry, 2009). Aside from Britain and Denmark, two of the
EUs top ten economies, Sweden and Poland, also decided to remain outside
EMU. The countries which formed the monetary union with the single currency
believed that the benefits from the union would outweigh the associated costs.

1. THE BENEFITS OF ADOPTING THE EURO

The benefits of issuing a single international currency are often overestimated by policymakers, observers and politicians. Both expected costs and expected benefits from the formation of EMU are not likely to be accurately estimated, as they are not always explicit and evident.
The main benefits of adopting the euro are the elimination of transaction
costs and the costs of exchange rate uncertainty, and greater price transparency.
1.1 Transactions costs
The benefit of elimination of transaction costs is that the euro cuts the costs
of transferring money from one country to another. This normally arises when
customers and businesses exchange currencies to buy goods and services from
other countries. According to the survey undertaken by European Commission
in 1990, the exchange rates and the commission charges which banks charge
165

Acta Economica

for buying and selling foreign currencies are about 0.4 percent of GDP in the
EU. However, for those countries with an advanced banking system like the
UK, the saving for transaction costs is much lower, no more than 0.1 per cent
of GDP each year (Minford, 2002).
As the huge number of currency exchange transactions operate via the banking system, the banks argue that they will lose an amount of revenue equivalent
to savings in transaction costs. On the other hand, most economists disagree, as
they do not consider "the banks lost income as a true cost to the total economy" (Zestos, 2006).
1.2 Exchange rate stability: more trade and investment
It is expected that the elimination of exchange rate risks against the euro
will encourage more trade among monetary union countries, increase foreign
investment in Europe, and reduce the cost of capital.
Adopting the euro currency restores the confidence of everyone involved in investment or foreign trade with EU partners, because they do not incur unexpected
losses due to volatility in exchange rates. There are several studies suggesting that
currencies do affect trade, because separate currencies represent a serious obstacle.
Due to currency uncertainly investors are often required to pay an extra interest rate
called a risk premium on the securities of countries considered to be at risk of devaluation. However, EMU makes these interest rates disappear, therefore reducing
the risk of investing in other countries within the Union (Huhne, 2001).
It is evident that the euro eliminates exchange rate risk from euro zone
trade, but it is exposed to fluctuations against other major investment and trade
currencies such as the US dollar.
1.3 Greater Price Transparency
In the EMU, expressing price in a single currency allows businesses and
consumers to compare prices more easily. In terms of efficiency, making prices
easy to compare across national markets represents a key advantage of monetary union. Price transparency for small items is unlikely to matter, but for
large consumer durables it has a significant effect. Consumers will usually buy
from the cheapest sources and thus they will apply pressure to companies to reduce prices and to increase competitiveness (Huhne, 2001).

2. COSTS OF THE MONETARY UNION

The main costs identified in the formation of the monetary union are the
loss of exchange rate policies, powers over monetary and fiscal policies, and
the possibility of bailing out continental countries with financial problems.
166

In the case of recession, an EMU country cannot depend on its monetary

and exchange rate policies to counter the effects of the failed economy, while a
non-EMU member can exercise its monetary policy. Thus, it can reduce interest rates to increase domestic consumption and investment. Under a flexible
exchange rate policy, a non-monetary union member can depreciate its currency to improve its trade and thus to increase the value of its exports and to reduce its imports. This would increase the countrys GDP (Zestos, 2006).
Fiscal policy represents an alternative instrument to monetary policy for
stabilising total demand. Governments with a flexible fiscal policy can borrow
money against future tax income to stimulate demand during a recession and
repay the borrowings during a boom in the economy. For EMU members, there
is a requirement by the Stability and Growth Pact to limit the budget deficit to
3 percent of GDP, in order to prevent irresponsible government borrowing and
damaging the European Central Banks monetary policies (Baimbridge, 2000).
The actual position is, however, that most EMU members do not comply
with the Pact and the Treaty regulations. In particular, in 2009 Greece, Ireland
and Spain had budget deficits of 12.7 percent, 11.7 percent and 11.4 percent respectively. The overall government deficit in the euro zone as a whole in 2009
was 6.2 percent, while the overall euro zone public debt is 78.7 percent of GDP
(ECB Bulletin, March 2010).
Table 2.1: Budget balance and Public Debt, as % of GDP

Budgetsurplus(+)/deficit()
Country
2007
2008
2009
Belgium
0.2
1.2
5.9
Germany
0.2
0.0
3.2
Ireland
0.3
7.2
11.7
Greece
3.7
7.7
12.7
Spain
1.9
4.1
11.4
France
2.7
3.4
7.9
Italy
1.5
2.7
5.3
Cyprus
3.4
1.0
0.8
Luxemburg
3.7
2.5
1.1
Malta
2.2
4.7
3.8
Netherlands
0.2
0.7
4.9
Austria
0.6
0.4
3.5
Portugal
2.6
2.7
9.3
Slovenia
0.0
1.8
5.7
Slovakia
1.9
2.3
6.3
Finland
5.2
4.4
2.2
Euroarea
0.0
2.0
6.2
Source: ECB Bulletin, March 2010

2007
84.2
65.0
25.1
95.6
36.1
63.8
103.5
58.3
6.6
62.0
45.5
59.5
63.6
23.3
29.9
35.2
53.6

Publicdebt
2008
89.8
65.9
44.1
99.2
39.7
67.4
105.8
49.3
13.5
63.6
58.2
62.6
65.9
22.5
27.7
34.2
69.4

2009
97.9
72.5
64.5
113.4
55.2
77.4
115.1
46.8
14.9
66.8
62.3
66.5
75.2
34.4
37.1
41.8
78.7

167

Acta Economica

There is an argument that a collapse of the Pact may lead to the collapse of
the euro. Some economists propose that is not possible to control a system
where fiscal policy is decentralised, while the monetary policy is centralised.
The Keynesian economists argue that the initial rules of the Stability Pact were
flawed and may result in damaging fiscal policies (requiring EMU countries to
cut public spending and to raise taxes during a recession) (Patterson, 2006).

3. CURRENT FINANCIAL CRISIS AND IMPACT ON THE EURO

The euro contributed to macroeconomic stability within the euro zone, but
the global financial crisis shows the weaknesses of the control and management
capabilities of the EMU. Although the euro provides stability to its members
and served to protect some of them against the effects of the financial crisis,
there are doubts about the ability of the euro zone to respond to global banking
problems.
The euro area has faced an existential crisis since the single currency was
launched. This apparently "vindicates the sceptics who have long regarded the
euro zone as unsuitable for a single monetary policy given the divergence of its
members" (Garnham, 2010). Although the UK and the US have financial problems, the market has mainly focused on the euro rather than on the sterling or
the dollar. The UK and the US are in a more favourable position than recently
afflicted EMU countries with large deficits because they have the independent
options to devalue or print money.
At present, Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal and Italy are the EMU members
with largest budget deficits and government debts, representing the major
breach of the euro area regulations on deficit management. In particular,
Greeces national debt of 300 billion euros (113.4 percent of GDP) is bigger
than the countrys economy, with predictions that it will reach 120 percent of
GDP in 2010 (ECB Bulletin, March 2010).
Due to irresponsible borrowing, years of uncontrolled spending, lack of financial reforms, and incompetence, Greece is badly exposed to the global financial downturn. Greece is an EMU country which was struggling to comply
with the Maastricht convergence criteria in 1999 when the euro was launched,
but by falsifying its budget deficit statistics the country joined the euro in 2001.
A year after adoption of the euro, Greece received from Goldman Sachs $1 billion through a swap on $10 billion of debt. The transaction consisted of a crosscurrency swap of $10 billion debt issued by Greece in dollars and yen that was
swapped into euros at the historical exchange rate. The swap reduced the countrys debt and generated $1 billion of funding. The contracts, which allowed
Greece to delay payments and shrink its reported budget deficit, present the
question of whether Greece used the swap to mask its true debt (Martinuzzi,
168

2010). In previous years, Italy used a similar trick to mask the true extent of its
deficit with the assistance of a US bank (Balzli, 2010).
The financial crisis made some of the euros weaknesses more apparent, indicating the need for an immediate response. Country risk differentiation is a
reality within the euro area where governments are solely responsible for their
own debt. Greeces deficit put the credibility of monetary union at risk. Leaving the euro zone is not a rational option for Greece and other troubled economies, but to fail to intervene and rescue them would have a severe effect on the
euro and the global financial system.
After months of political negotiations, on 11 of April 2010 a rescue package
was announced by the EU leaders, 30 billion euros in funds from Europe and
the IMF. Sceptics raise the prospect that the loan may be nothing more than a
"bandage on a wound that shows little sign of healing". Some analysts believe
that the package may have a long-term damaging effect. An economist at Morgan Stanley J. Fels states that "now there will be more fiscal profligacy in Europe, more political fractures and ultimately the possibility that some countries
might want to leave the Euro zone" (Thomas, 2010).

4. HAS THE EURO BEEN A SUCCESS?

The performance of the euro since its launching in 1999 is relatively impressive. The euro provided price stability to previously inflation-prone countries, and increased foreign investment from companies trading mostly outside
of Europe. It has been valuable for consumers because of the reduction in
transaction costs, and in addition for companies because they no longer have to
cope with exchange rate fluctuations. The key area where the euro has driven
greater banking efficiency and productivity has been in wholesale banking.
Thus, it has produced evident benefits for big companies and large investment
institutions, rather than for ordinary citizens (Marsh, 2009).
It is difficult to determine whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. The criteria for evaluating the performance of the euro need to be specified according to the situation whether in normal times or in financial crises
when the euro faces severe challenges. During financial crises financial stability has been at risk in the euro zone.
The benefits and costs of the EMU are different from the perspective of
each country within the euro zone. Some euro members such as France and
Germany have been afforded significant economic benefits from the euro,
while certain other states reward has been limited. For Ireland, EMU membership has not proved particularly beneficial, because the country mainly trades
with a non-euro zone member, the UK. A CESifo report by German experts
said the large fall in the value of sterling against the euro could be the key fac169

Acta Economica

tor in Ireland being the EMU member where "the recession has been the most
severe" (Lyons, 2010). It is argued that this country represents a significant risk
of a default or exit from the euro area.
Portugal is the other euro zone member that did not enjoy the benefits of
low interest rates as it did not evidence the positive outcome of a long period of
growth. Since adopting the single currency, Portuguese exporters have been
losing market share to competitors. Therefore, the government has been pushed
to borrow funds to finance the current accounts deficit which built up debt to its
current level. However, Portugal and Greece, as members of the euro area, do
not have flexible monetary policy with the power to print money or depreciate
their currencies and consequently to find their way to recovery (Thomas,
2010). Evidently, competitiveness imbalance was illustrated by significant
changes in EMU countries current account balance of payments an increase
of deficits in Greece, Spain and Italy, and large surpluses in Germany and
Netherlands.
The euro is currently going through a difficult period, mainly because of the
financial crisis in Greece. Greece, with a budget deficit of 12.7 percent and
debt 113.4 percent of GDP, is not able to pay its loans and could default on its
debts if not bailed out by the euro zone states and IMF (Wray, 2010). The
strongest euro zone economies of Germany and France were the prime movers
in pushing the rescue plan forward in order to solve this failing economys
problem.
There are further concerns that if the euro members bail-out Greece, they
may need to rescue other weak economies as well, such as Portugal, Spain,
Ireland and Italy. Thus, it might have an effect on the entire market that may
require a major financial support which could in turn result in harm to the
stronger euro zone economies.

CONCLUSION
The euro has been a success for the first ten years. It has contributed to macroeconomic stability within the euro zone and has brought low inflation and
interest rates. It is evident that the EMU has protected the euro zone economies
from instability over the last ten years of the euros existence, and it can be reasonably assumed that the current crisis would have had a more severe impact
without the euro.
During the next decade, the euro is however faced with challenges owing to
the current financial crisis and economic recession. The present crisis shows
the weaknesses in the control and crises management competence of the euro
zone. In order to forestall a negative impact of the crisis, the large account im-

170

balances in deficit countries need to be managed by spending reductions and

relative costs deflation.
The current financial crisis is affecting fiscal and financial stability in the
whole euro zone. As the crisis deepens, fiscal discipline comes under scrutiny,
and financial instability may have severe negative effects when weaker euro
zone governments are overwhelmed by the costs of the financial crisis.
The crisis in Greece, which mismanaged its economy and misled other
states about true budget figures, has an impact on the whole euro area. Greece,
with its huge budget deficit, is not able to repay its loans and may default on
them. Because allowing Greece to default would affect the euro and the financial stability of the euro zone, the other euro zone members agreed to bail out
the failed economy. However, there is a big concern that after rescuing Greece,
the euro states may need to bail out other weak economies such as Portugal,
Spain, Ireland and Italy. This would require a significant financial commitment
by the strong euro economies and may see them suffer too.
The euro is going through a difficult time and it is suffering from uncertainty. The pessimistic interpretation of "the Euros speedily-won status is that
pride goes before a fall" (Marsh, 2009). It is definitely too early to say whether
the single currency will end in success or failure.

REFERENCES
1. Baimbridge M., Burkitt B. and Whyman P. (2000). The Impact of The
Euro, London: MaCmilan Press Ltd.
2. Balzli, B. (2010). How Goldman Sachs Helped Greece to Mask Its True
Debt. [www] Spiegel Online. February 8. Available from:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,druck676634,00.htlm. [Accessed 22/03/2010].
3. Ferry, J. (2009). The Euro at Ten: The Next Global Currency? Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics Brussels.
4. Garnham, P. (2010). Euro project tested by Greek crisis. Financial
Times. London (UK). February 13, p. 21.
5. Huhne, C. (2001). Both sides of the coin: the arguments For and Against
the Euro. London: Profile Books Ltd.
6. Issing, O., Gaspar, V.,Angeloni, I. and Tristani, O. (2001) Monetary Policy in the Euro Area, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Lyons, N. (2010). How Ireland may collapse the Euro. Daily Mail. London (UK). February 15. p. 8.
8. Marsh, D. (2009). The Euro: The Politics of the New Global Currency.
London: Yale University Press.
171

Acta Economica

9. Martinuzzi, E., and Finch, G. (2010). Greeces Goldman Sachs Swaps

Spawn EU Dispute on Disclosure. Business Week. February 15.
10. Minford P, (2002). Should Britain Join the Euro? London: The Institute
of Economic Affairs.
11. Patterson, B. (2006). The Euro: Success or Failure? European Movement. Briefing 6. February 2006.
12. R.A. (2010). The Euro stops where? [www] The Economist. February 8.
Availbale from:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freexchange/2010/02/european_monet
ary_unionn.htlm [Accessed 04/03/2010].
13. Resnick, B.G. and Eun, C.S. (2001). International Financial Management. 2nd ed. New York: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
14. Sear, S. (1999), What every Bussiness Needs to Know about the Euro:
Gower Publishing Limited, England
15. Thomas, L. (2010). Debt Worries Shift to Portugal, Spurred by Rising
Bond Rates. [www] New York Times. April 15. Available from:
http;//www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/business/global/16business/global/
16escudo.htlm
16. Wray, R. (2010). EU ministers agree Greek bailout terms.
[www]Guardian. 11 April. Available from :
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/11/eu-greece-bailoutterms.htlm
17. Zestos, K.G. (2006), European Monetary Integration: The Euro. USA:
Thompson South-Western.

172

 336.74 (497.6 )

ANALYSIS OF YIELD INVESTORS IN CAPITAL MARKET

BONDS OF THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIAN
*
**

"


."
. a

.

, .
2008. ,
*

, , ,
,

**

Acta Economica

, , ,

,
.
,
2008. 2009.
. 15.04.2010.
24 , 14
, 6 , 4
.
.

.

, .

,
.
: e, ,
, , ;

Summary
The capital market of the Republic of Srpska in the last two years was a
sudden drop in prices of financial instruments that are the subject of trading
with us for now the only Stock Exchange - Banja Luka Stock Exchange. Capital market is the segment of the econom wich first detect and react to the crisis,
much before the crisis is felt in the real sphere of economy. In 2008, the current
epicenter of the earthquake in the capital markets in the region, as well as the
Banja Luka Stock Exchange, and decrease investor confidence, resulting in
connection with the crisis-risk mortgage bond market in the United States,
which has caused the global credit crisis and leading the world economy to the
recession. However, the issue of bonds in the capital market of the Republic of
Srpska in 2008 and 2009 a positive impact on price movements of securities at
the Banja Luka Stock Exchange. On 15.04.2010 The Banja Luka Stock Exchange bond portfolio made up 24 bonds, of which 14 are government bonds, 6
Municipal, and the remaining 4 are bonds of companies. Bonds are becoming
increasingly important financial instrument in the capital market of the Republic of Srpska. It goes in favor of the conclusion that in recent times sales of
bonds on the Banja Luka Stock Exchange in a higher than average shares. In174

vestment policy must be created as a compromise between yield and risk, and
must meet requirements regarding liquidity, revenues and taxes. Given that the
yield of the main motive of investors investing in the capital market, the paper
was given to quantitative analysis of yield investors in bonds.
Key words: bonds, effective yield investors, offering up to expiry, bonds,
bond rating;

,
.
, .
, , , , .
i . risk-return trade off.

. 24 , , 14 6 , .
.1
, , ,
.

.
, ,
, .
,
.
, ,
1

, ., , , , 2003, . 262.

175

Acta Economica

. ,
, .
2008. 2009. ,
, - ,
.

1.
, ,

. , ,

. .
,
. , , . ,
, .
, . , ,
,
.
,

,

176

.2 (. Bond) () ()
.3
,
. , -, .
. ,

,
. , ,
, ..
.. .
, , , .
, . ,
. ,
,
.
(coupon bonds) , ( , ), ,
. ,
, .
, ,

.
(. government bonds)
( )
2

, 4.
Fabozzi, F., J., Fabozzi, T., D., Bond Markets, Analysis and Strategies, Prentice-Hall International Inc. 1989, . 1.

177

Acta Economica

. ,
, . .
,
. ,
,
, .
, .
,
.
,
, ,

. ,
.

.
, ,
. ,
.

.
,
.
,
, , , , . ,
31.12.1991.
178

.
(15.04.2004.) , .
181,9 .
. , . ,
,

(
31.12.1992.
0.5 % 15.04.2004.
),
2.5 % .
,
2.000,00 , 28.02.2008. .
90% 90,5% , 85% ,
11%, , 2013. , 2014. , .4
, (Municipal bonds, Local authority bonds)
,
, . ,
.

, .
,
. . 4

, 30 50 ,
. ,
, .

179

Acta Economica

,
.
,
, , , ,
, .
, , .
. , , , , .
1: 2009. 5
/Issuer

180

/Sym / / / %/
/
bol
Lowprice Highprice NominalValue EffectiveYTM%
TotalValue
SNPOOA

100.00

100.00

100

8.14

40,000.00

BDDSOA

95.00

95.00

delisted

2,214.45

BDDSOB

87.00

89.77

18.89

6,814.52

BDDSOC

77.00

84.70

13.01

6,904.43

BLKBOA

89.18

97.40

100

6.88

4,190,470.52

LKSDOA

100.00

100.00

100

5.82

928,750.00

RSDSOA

84.50

92.50

8.81

3,776,915.58

RSDSOB

85.00

87.54

9.04

386,439.39

RSIOOA

20.00

47.00

11.07

30,818.28

RSODOB

35.00

49.00

11.40

15,646.27

RSRSOA

22.00

60.00

14.89

6,546,362.10

RSRSOB

25.50

60.02

13.80

4,564,014.03

RSRSOC

33.51

47.00

15.12

9,052,200.85

VBBBOA

93.00

94.64

100

16.05

703,626.54

/Total

30,251,176.95

http://www.blberza.com, 2009. .

(Corporate bonds)
()

.
, .
. , , .

2008. 11 673 573 . 4,24% .
2008, 2009.
30 251 177 , . 16,76% ,

2009.
.

2.

. (return) ,
.6 , ,

. ,
(. capital gain).
, .
, .
,

. .

.
6

, ., , , , 2003, .146.

181

Acta Economica

(Nominal yield, coupon yield)

, () ,
, .
. (current yield). ,
( ,
) .7
, .
,
, , .
, (yield to
maturity). ,
.
.
. ,
.8
.
, .
, ,
, .
,
, .
,
.
.

, ., , ., , , 2006, . 236.
8

, . .

182

1.

KM;
% ( % );
( );
2.

:
( ),
,
3.

:
,
.
4.

%
59.

:
() , ,
, ,..., (),
,
() ;
9

: , ., , ., ,
, 2006, . 152.

183

Acta Economica

, . 2 4 3 5,
.

, ( ). ,
, . ,
. ,
,
. , , .
, 5 6.10
6.11

:
, ,..., ,
.
:

10

,
.
11
: , ., , ., ,
, 2006, . 152.

184

,
, .12

100

100

3.
, .-

(. internal rate of return)
. ,
.

,
.13
,
. , , ,
. . , , . ,
,
12

, . , , , 2002, . 14.
13
, . , , , 2009,
. 356.

185

Acta Economica

. ,
,
,
.14


.

.

, . ,

.

, . 28. 02. 2008. 209.742.717 , 1 . 2,5 %,

.
. . ,

.
. .
. (
) ( )
.
14

: , ., , ., , , 2006 ,. 152.

186

, 24.03.2008.
0.90%
0.60%
.


7 5 .
2008.
,
0.60% 0.80%
0.85% .
2008. 7.223.632,00 ,
. 2009.
4.163.355,00 ,


.
2.
2: 15

0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

28.2.2008
28.8.2008
28.2.2009
28.8.2009
28.2.2010
28.8.2010
28.2.2011
28.8.2011
28.2.2012
28.8.2012
28.2.2013

0,00000
0,11250
0,11125
0,11000
0,10875
0,10750
0,10625
0,10500
0,10375
0,10250
0,10125

0,00000
0,01250
0,01125
0,01000
0,00875
0,00750
0,00625
0,00500
0,00375
0,00250
0,00125

1,00
0,90
0,80
0,70
0,60
0,50
0,40
0,30
0,20
0,10
0,00

2009.
,
15

http://www.blberza.com/v2/Pages/YtmCalculator.aspx

187

Acta Economica

.
2009. 1.40 %
( 2009. 1.67
23.333.877,27 ). , ,
5% ,
18% .

1.3 , ,
. , ,

.
.
28.02.2010. 100.000

89 % .
,
.
- ,
, 0,70%
( ).
, , :
3:
53.773,80 , 28.02.2010.

28.02.2010.
28.08.2010.
28.02.2011.
28.08.2011.
28.02.2012.
28.08.2012.
28.02.2013.

188

60,000.00
60,000.00
60,000.00
60,000.00
60,000.00
60,000.00
60,000.00

60,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
50,000.00
16.667%
10,000.00
750.00
10,750.00
40,000.00
16.667%
10,000.00
625.00
10,625.00
30,000.00
16.667%
10,000.00
500.00
10,500.00
20,000.00
16.667%
10,000.00
375.00
10,375.00
10,000.00
16.667%
10,000.00
250.00
10,250.00
0.00
16.667%
10,000.00
125.00
10,125.00
()
60,000.00
2,625.00
62,625.00

, . ,

.
, :
7.

:
= 100 000,
% = 89%
= 0,60 1 :
% 89% 0,60 0,534
2
:
100.000 0,534 53.400
:
0,70%.

, , , , , 3.
7, .

100.000 0,534

53.400 0,70
10.750,00 10.625,00
1
1
10.250,00 10.125,00
1
1

10.500,00
1

10.375,00
1

189

Acta Economica

,
( ).
,
: 4,58391%

, , 4,58391%
.

100

4,58391%

100

100

100

9,37794%
, 28.02.2010. 53 773,80 100 000 1 , 89%
9,37794%. 9,37794%,
, ,

.
-
, .
(. brokerage, broker's commission)
.
,
. - . 4. ,
. ,
, -
2009. .

190

4:
- 2009. 16

7.5009.999

1,0%

0,65%
(.10) 100.000,00
100.000,01
100.000,01
0,40%
500.000,01
500.000,00
500.000,01
500.000,01
0,30%
2.000.000,00
2.000.000,00
2.000.000,01
0,20%
2.000.000

10.00019.999

0,9%

20.00049.999

0,9%

50.000200.000

0,6%

200.000

0,5%

1.000

1,3%

1.0015.000

1,2%

5.0017.499

1,1%

100.000,00

0,70%
0,40%
0,30%
0,20%

4.
,
.
.
,
. -
, : Moody's Investors Service Inc., Standard & Poor's Division of the McGraw-Hill Companies Inc., Fitch Investor Service, .
,
28.05.2010..
.
16

http://www.advantisbroker.com
http://www.bobarbanka.com
http:/www.hypo-alpe-adria.rs.ba

191

Acta Economica

5: 1
17

(%..)
28.05.2010.

BDDSO
89.00
1 B
2

28.05.2010.

89.00

0.89

46.22%

2 RSRSOA
1

3 RSRSOC
3

4 RSRSOB
2

5 RSODO
B
2

BDDSO
6 C

7 RSIOOA
RSDSO
8 A
1

9 RSDSOB
2

31.00

31.00

0.31

19.17%

30.98

31.00

0.31

18.40%

30.58

30.00

0.31

18.14%

41.00

41.00

0.41

13.62%

88.00

88.00

0.88

13.00%

47.00

47.00

0.47

11.53%

90.00

90.00

0.54

10.33%

87.00

87.00

0.78

9.49%

1 BNIFOA

100.45

100.45

96.85

6.75%

GRDSO
2 A

100.49

100.49

83.74

5.86%

3 LKSDOA

100.51

100.51

78.40

5.56%

100.66

50.33

4.72%

100.00

83.33

8.15%

BLMIO

4 A

SNPOO .. 100.00
1 A

18

17

.

, .

, , : BDDS-O-D, BDDS-O-E, BDDS-O-F, BDDS-O-G, RSOD-O-A,
SMFO-O-A, CERP-O-B, BLMI-O-A, VBBB-O-A.

o BLMI-O-A,
/ .

192

, 28.05.2010.

" - 2".

,
,
. ,
, ,
.
,
.
,

.

, ,
. T
,

()
.
,
,
.
,

.

,

.
,
,
,
.
,
. 2007.
193

Acta Economica

80%
.

, ,

,
.

.

.
,

,
.
,
.
,
,
.
,
,
.
,

.

1. Bodie, Z., Kane i A., J., Mareus, , , , 2009.

2. Bodie, Z., Kane, A., Marcs J., , , , 2006.
3. Van Horne, J., Wachowicz, J., ,
, , 2002.
4. 2009. ,
5. , ., , , ,
2003.
6. ,
" , . 28/06
7. , .
92/06
194

8.
,
" " . 1/08
9. , . , ,
, 2008.
10. , .,
, , , 2002.
11. , ., ,
, , 2009.
12.
, "
" . 20/08
13. , ., , ,
, 1980.
14. , ., , ., ,
, , 1991.
15. Fabozzi, F., J., Fabozzi, T., D., Bond Markets, Analysis and Strategies,
Prentice-Hall International Inc. 1989.
16. Frederic, S. Mishkin, Stanley, G., Eakins, +
, , , 2005.
17. , ., , ., ,
, 2006.
18. , ., -
, , 2006.
19. URL:http://www.access2finance.eu/
20. URL:http://www.blberza.com

195

 336.74 (497.1)

" "

CAPITAL MARKET IN THE REPUBLIC OF SERBIA IN THE PERIOD OF TRANSITION "EMERGING MARKETS"
*

, , ,
,
.
""
.
: , , ,
, .

Summary
In time the world financial flows globalization, monetary integration,deregulation,and new information technologies, the importance gaininig development of efficient capital markets, as an integral part of financial markets each
national economy. The aim of this work paper is to point out some adventages
*

, .. ,,",

Acta Economica

and disadventages capital market development "young" capital market in transition period of Serbian economy.
Key words: capital market,capitalization,legislation,categorization
risk,Belgrade stock market

of

, ,
,
. ,
.
. ,
.
,
o . , , , .
. :
, , . , ,

,
, ( ), , .

. ,
. , , .

.

200

" "

, , , - . , .
, , . .
,
,
. ,
.

. ,
.

1.
1.1.

,
. , :1

,
.
,
1

: , ,
, , , , 1999, . 35-37.

201

Acta Economica

, (.
) .
. ,
.
.
. ,
,
"" , , 30 , . , , .
, ,
() .

, , ,

, .
, ,
() .

, , ,

, . .

. , () , . :
.
,
, 202

" "

, , , , , , .
. .

.
, ,
, .
, ,
.
.
, .
1.2.
, , " "
."

.
, ; ."2
conditio sine qu non , . ", ,
."3

. , , :4
2

Bernard J.Foley, Capital market, Macmillian Education Ltd London, 1991, str. 200.
Robinson, J., Economic Philosophy, Pelican Books,London, 1964, str.10.
4
, , , , 1997,
.45.
3

203

Acta Economica

( , .).
( , ).
, , ,
o .

. :
(". ". 47/06);
(". " . 125/04);
(". " . 72/03 61/05);
(". " . 72/03);
(". " . 38/01,18/03,45/05);
(". " . 46/06,
51/09);
(". " .
46/06);
(". " . 71/02);
:
(". " . 25/01);
(". " . 80/02,84/02);
(". ". 84/04);
(". " . 1/03);
(". ". 92/09).
,

, . , .

, .

, .
, ,
204

" "

,
. .

, , , .

,
1990. . , .

(IOSCO), ,
, , , , .
, . .
, ,
,
, ,
, , , .
1.3.
5
, , ,
(), .
, 5

". " . 65 29. 2002. .

205

Acta Economica

, . . , , , -
. 6 () , , . . ,
, .
. , ,

, .
"" ,
. ,
. , , .
. , .
,
.
. 2004. , ,
.
,
. , , (.
-).

206

". " .125 22. 2004. .

" "

, ,
.
. , . . , ,
cash flow ,
.
:
,
, . , , () .

, .
. , , . , , - , , .
, , .
100%. , , , .

3 , . ,
, . , , , 207

Acta Economica

"" .

.
1.4.

.
,
( ).

:7


. .
"" , , , - .
.
,
,
. , (, .)

,
,
.
90-
,
, . , ,
.

7

. , ,
, , 2006, . 234.

208

" "

.
, , (, ,
.).

, . , .

, . 80% .8 ,
. ,
.
Standard&Poor's
,
1-10 : , , , .9


( ,
, , .).
,
, " " -

Corporate Finance, October 2001, London, Euromoney Institutional Investor, str.54.

, , ,
2004, .6.

209

Acta Economica

, , .

. .
,
, , .
, y-,

. , ( , , , ,
"" .).

2. " "
( )
, ,
. ,
, ,
,
( , , , , .), . , ( )
, . 2000. ,

( ).
. ,
"" .
.


210

" "

, ,
. , , . , , ,
.
,
. ,
, ,
, .
( ) . ( ) ( ).
, , . . 1989. ( ), , ,
.
1995-1999. . ,
, .

, , .
, , ,
, "" , . "",
211

Acta Economica

,
.

. .
, 1997, 60% .
, 2001, 30%, 15%, , ,

. (, )
.

, .
. 1: 2004.
/Total
2004.
/No

/
Turnover

/Notes

/Bonds

/
commercial

/
No

/
Turnover

/No

/
Turnover

/Shares

/corporate
/
No

/
Turnover

/
No

/
Turnover

5.962

2.254.656.963

286

667.561.976

4.915

588.516.987

761

998.578.000

II

10.135

3.773.652.134

244

517.388.527

7.081

773.286.168

590

580.835.419

2.220

1.902.142020
6.272.924.914

III

14.160

7.874.175.526

158

300.013.873

6.581

762.847.739

498

538.389.000

6.923

IV

9.303

1.837.514.175

104

217.782.127

5.391

612.013.673

335

380.406.000

3.473

627.312.375

9.270

2.439.967.713

197

392.586.466

4.481

575.625.803

296

448.796.000

4.296

1.022.959.444

VI

12.200

2.692.883.228

80

118.899.072

5.792 1.003.351.995

232

342525.000

6.096

1.228.107.161

VII

14.542

2.503.389.094

23

15.740.849

5.444

721.314.773

162

209.327.000

8.913

1.557.006.472

VIII

11.754

3.011.322.453

39

68.250.000

4.866

719.600.861

143

158.153.000

6.706

2.065.318.592

IX

11.245

3.322.397.138

4903

910.230.921

51

42.177.180

6.291

2.369.989.037

11.479

3.146.192.640

5.093

669.997.220

6.386

2.476.195.420

XI

12.455

2.598.810.685

5.894

887.658.570

4.231.350

6.558

1.706.920.765

16.337

5.128.701.794

5.401

818.108.832

15.756.364

10.934

4.294.836.598

XII
.

138.842 40.583.663.543

1.131 2.298.222.890

65.842 9.042.553.542

3.073 3.719.174.313

68.796 25.523.712.798

. 1
2004. 40.583.663.543,00 ,
2003. ,
93.070.409.210,00 .
2004.
62,89% (25,5 . .),
2003, 212


" "

32,76% (30,5 . .), 2004. .

5 . .
22,28% (9 . .),
9,16% (3,7 . .),
5,66%.
, 2003. . 10 . . 6 2003. . 23 . .

,
2004. .
. 2: 2005. .
2005.

11.675 3.372.026.573

3.522

743.596.015

8.153

18.887 4.635.574.001

3.852

694.451.018

15.035 3.941.122.983

2.628.430.558

20.584 5.631.103.790

4.668

804.400.893

15.916 4.826.702.897

11.338 2.293.365.823

3.403

553.211.490

7.935

1.740.154.333

10.779 2.479.524.498

3.897

656.898.168

6.882

1.822.626.330

12.774 3.020.261.989

4.375

736.379.673

8.399

2.283.882.316

11.834 3.171.460.876

3.870

639.940.833

7.964

2.531.520.043

14.859 3.957.906.115

4.038

792.809.501

10.821 3.165.096.614

14.564 3.727.920.188

3.734

889.383.093

10.830 2.838.537.095

14.615 4.023.806.348

4.232

924.656.340

10.383 3.099.150.008

16.147 6.152.748.103

3.843

735.010.052

12.304 5.417.738.051

15.429 5.884.972.305

3.388 1.020.457.815

12.041 4.864.514.490

173.485 48.350.670.609 46.822 9.191.194.891

126.663 39.159.475.718

. 2 2004.
2005. , 2004. .
63% , 2005.
81%. 2005. . ( ), 2004. . .
2004. (49,55%), (47,42%), (2,21%)
(0,81%). 2005. 73,01%, .

213

Acta Economica

. 2:


2004
4. 2005.

2004.

63%

;6%
%

2005.

;
81%

;19%

;22%

;
9%

:10 (1)
, ((2)




, (3)

, (4)
, (5)


.

.


,
.

31
1. 12. 2004.
. 339,24 . ,

4,3 . , 2003.
. 338,07%.

56% (190 . 2,41 . ),

149,2
1
.
, 1,9

. .

.

31. 12. 200

05.

570 , . 6,7
. 214

" "

68,2%,

31,8%.

. 3: ,
,

2004.

/)

(
/)

(/

23,8%

2,85%
%

11
1,95%

440

: , Anual report-

2004. .

0,5
514/18,06

0,,514/4,3

2004.

23,,8% .
,

2003. 130,3%
%,
134
4,4%.

. 3:

200
04/2005.

8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000

05

05

05

05

05

05

05

05

05

05

05

05

04

04
04

04

04

04

04

04

04

04

03

04

31. 12. 2005.

570 , . 6,7 .


68,2%,
31,8%.

2115

Acta Economica

. 4:

60
0%
50
0%
40
0%
30
0%
20
0%
10
0%
0
0%

48%

13,60%
%

9,20% 7,90%
4,90%
4,3
30% 3,90% 2,70% 2,40% 1,90% 1,2
20%

. 5



2005
5. , 10 ,

. 5:

,
2005.(
)
14
4
12
2
10
0
8
6
4
2
0

12,79

12,24
10,34
7,39
5,5

4,4

3
3,1
1,08

0,82

0,14

,
,

,

,

,
. 216

" "

. ,
,
,
, , .
.
,
.

3.
2008.
, .
,
, ,
. ,

, 2007. . . 2008. . :10

, , , ,
2012,
,
,
,
, ,
, ,
,
,
10

, 2008 - Annual Report 2008, .25.

217

Acta Economica

,
.

20088. .

71,8 ,
882
,

56,4%

, .

. 6:
2008.

;40,40%

;7,40%

/
Companies;
52,20%

: ,
2008. .

2008. ,

2007.
.

52,2%.

40,4%
4

,
.

,
,
,

218

" "

, ,
. .
.
, .

, " "
.

,
.

, , ,
.

4.

.
:11

.
,
.
,
.
.
.
11

, , , , , , 1990, . 36.

219

Acta Economica

,
.
( ).

.
.
( ).

.
.
, ,
.
, ,
. , ( , , ). : , ,
, (
) .
. : - . , , , , .
. ,
. ,
,
,
. ,
, . . .

220

" "

.

, , , . ,
, .

.
( ).
, ,
.
,
"" - .
,
. , . ,

.
. , .
, , , .
.
:
( ), () , ( ), , ,
.
221

Acta Economica

. ,
-, - , , , . , ,
, .
220%.
, "" . , -.
,
.
, , , ,
.
:
, , . , ,
.

1. Bernard J. Foley: Capital market, Macmillan Education Ltd London,

1991.
2. , : , , , 2006.
3. , : , , ,
1997.
4. : ,
, , 1990.
5. , : , ,
1997.
6. Robinson, J.: Economic Philosophy, Pelican Books, London, 1964.

222

" "

7. , : - , ,
1990.
8. , : , , 1997.
:
9. Corporate Finance, Euromoney Institutional Investor, October 2001.
10. , : ,
,
79/1999.
11. , ; , :

, ,
, 2001.
12. , ., , .,: , , , , 1990.
13. , :
,
, 2004.
14. , ; , ; , : , , , 1991.
15. , , 2008.

www.nbs.yu
www.ekonomist.co.yu
www.belex.yu
http/portal.komora.net

223

 330.322

HE FINANCIAL APPRAISAL OF THE FOREIGN

INVESTMENT PROJECTS

, . e.

. ,

. , . ,
.

, ,

Acta Economica

. ,
, a
.
: , ,
, , .

Summary
Considering global trends in the business world and growing extroversion of
the world economies, today's enterprises are faced with the inevitability of investing abroad. Majority of multinational companies set up subsidaries in each
country they have the interest to operate. International capital budgeting is defined as decision-making process on long-term investment of financial funds in
real business assets abroad. In the viability appraisal of overseas investment
projects, it is necessary to consider all the factors that influence evaluation process and choose projects profitable from the standpoint of the parent company.
The main inputs in the international capital budgeting are discount rate defining, cash flows appraisal and forecast exchange rate selection. For financial
rating of international projects, evaluation is extended by introducing adjusted
net cash flow and modified net present value.
Follow-up of the work and the results lead to conclusion that careful international capital budgeting is very significant for existence and further growth
of multinational company. With the appreciation of the risk typical for international investment and proffesional appraisal of foreign projects, financial managers will decide to invest in project with the highest net present value and thus
achieve the greatest benefits for shareholders of the company.
Key words: discount rate, modified net cash flows, net present value, systematic risk, international capital price.

.

.
226

,
.
. , , .
, o , .

, ,
.
, . .

.
, . ,
. ,
.

.

.
: ?
, .
,

, .

227

Acta Economica

. , , .

1.
,
. :
1.
:
;

,
;
2. ;
3. :
, ,
1.
,
,
. ,
.
. . , , ,
. .
,
.
1

228

: www.efnfak.ni.ac.rs

1.1.
.
.

, . . .
,
.
, . ,
. .
.
,
.
.
,

, . ,
- . .
. 2
. ,
2

229

Acta Economica

. , 3:

4:

1.2.

,
.
, ,
. ,
,
,
.
, .
1.2.1.

,
, :
( ) ().
, , , . () , ,
. ,
,
, 3
4

230

Brooks, R. Financial Management: Core Concepts. London: Pearson Education, 2010, . 559
Ibidem.

. ,
.
5 :

. . ,

.

..

.
.
, .

. . 6
.

, .
.
. , . , 5

: www.efnfak.ni.ac.rs.
,
(know-how, , , .).
6
=

231

Acta Economica

,

. ,
10%, 40%,
(10%), (30%).
,
, (10% + 40% = 50%).
.

.
, .
, .
. 1: 7

: ,
7

232

: www.efnfak.ni.ac.rs

()

: () () ,
,
, , ,
, ,
.

2.

2.1.
() , . . () , ,
. ,
, . ,
. ,
.

8:

1

,


, ()
8

, .; , .. , . :
, 2005, . 265.

233

Acta Economica

() , .
,
. ,
.9 ,
. () (). , .
,
. ,
,
. ,

, .
,
, .
. 2: 10

(>0)?

. 9

, . . : ,
2005, .418.
10
: www.efnfak.ni.ac.rs

234

,
.
, . ,
.
1:
:
( ) ()11
, . 5 , :
: 120.000.000

1.:30.000.000
2.:45.000.000
3.:56.000.000
4.:48.000.000
5.:34.000.000

: 6.000.000
() :6,000,000 5.
12% .
4%, 7%. 13,25 .
)
( )
I
1.:13,25x
2.:13,25x
3.:13,25x
4.:13,25x
5.:13,25x

1,07/1,04
1,07/1,04 2
1,07/1,04 3
1,07/1,04 4
1,07/1,04 5

13,6322
14,0254
14.4300
14,8463
15,2745

II
.

1.

: 120.000.0006.000.000 /13,25 9.509.434$

:30.000.000/13,6322 2.200.670$

11

: Brooks, R. Financial Management: Core Concepts. London:

Pearson Education, 2010, . 560.

235

Acta Economica

2.
3.
4.
5.

:45.000.000/14,0254 3.208.454$
:56.000.000/14,4300 3.880.796$
:48.000.000/14,8463 3.233.133$

: 34.000.000 6.000.000 /15,2745 2.618.737$

III 12%
9.509.434$
1.
1 2.200.670/1,12 1.964.884$
2.
2 3.208.454/1,122 2.557.760$
3.
3 3.880.796/1,123 2.762.274$
4.
4 3.233.133/1,124 2.054.715$
5.
4 2.618.737/1,125 1.485.942$

IV

1.964.884$ 2.557.760$ 2.762.274$ 2.054.715$ 1.485.942$

9.509.434$ 1.316.140$

V : ,
.
) - ( )
I kf

kf

1 kd x 1 / 1 1

kd
kf 1,12x 1,07/1,04 1 15,2307692%

II
120.000.0006.000.000 126.000.000
1.
30.000.000/1,1523 26.034.712,95
2.
45.000.000/1.15232 33.890.313,92
3.
56.000.000/1.15233 36.600.131,34
4.
48.000.000/1.15234 27.224.968,95
5.
34.000.000 6.000.000 /1.15235 19.688.729,22

III ( )
26.034.712,95 33.890.313,92 36.600.131,34 27.224.968,95 19.688.7
29,22126.000.000 17.438.856,38

IV
$ 17.438.856,38/13,25 1.316.140$

236

V : ,
.
, , , . ,
,
. , ,
.
. , , . ,
.
2.2.
" ()
, , .
= /
= / "12
.
,

.

, .
. ,
. , .
12

, . . : ,
2005: , . 421.

237

Acta Economica

. ,
.
2.3.
(), , . .
,
13.
.

, .
,
. , . , .
2.4.


. , .
()

.14
13

, ; , .. .
: , 1986, . 287.
14
: www.efnfak.ni.ac.rs

238

. .
, .
(. ).

.
PNSV 0.

- ;

- ( )

()


,
, .

3.

, . , 15:
;
( ) ;
15

Parino, R.; Kidwelll, D. Fundamentals of Corporate Finance. New York: John Wiley& Sons,
Inc, 2009, . 708.

239

Acta Economica

.
, . (CAPM)
( )
. (ki)
( ) i
(
).
(
)
. , .

16

17
CAPM- ( )

. , , . .
.

,
, . ,
. CAPM18:

16

( )
, . .
17
( ) ,
.
18
, . . : ,
2005, . 443.

240

;
;
(
).
, .

.
.
, , .
. ,

, CAPM-.
2: .19
,
. je , 2007.
65% ( :) 646 . 18. 2007.
50 .
2006. 39,58 ,
. ,
,
.
,
, . , 19

: ; " " a.d. 2006., 2007., 2008., " " a.d. 2007., 2008, www.blberza.com.

241

Acta Economica

.
( ).
CAPM, ().
I (
):
( ) , 11,74%.
0,7.20
:
11,74% 0,7 15,4%11,74% 14,3%
II
:
15 ,
, .
,
, ,
2006. 83.358.355,83 21. , . , 2007. 55
(65% 83 ).
,
50%. 17%,
15%, 12% 18%, .

22 ,
.
5%. ,
3% .

646.000.00050.000.000
20

696.000.000

" " .. 2008. . ,

" "
. ,

, .
21
www.blberza.com
22
www.telekom.rs

242

1.:
55.000.000/1,143 48.118.985,13
2.:
83.000.000/1,1432 63.530.991,26
3.:
97.000.000/1,1433 64.958.059,56
4.:
111.000.000/1,1434 65.033.639,19
5.:
124.000.000/1,1435 63.560.972,48
6.:
146.000.000/1,1436 65.474.994,92
7.:
172.000.000/1,1437 67.484.624,26
8.:
172.000.000/1,1438 59.041.666,02
9.:
163.000.000/1,1439 48.952.122,93
10.:
154.000.000/1,14310 40.463.031,48
11.:
149.000.000/1,14311 34.251.353,19
12.:
149.000.000/1,14312 29.966.188,26
13.:
145.000.000/1,14313 25.513.321,81
14.:
142.000.000/1,14314 21.859.545,04
15.:
142.000.000 267.000.000 /1,14315 55.084.555,85

.
44 23,
65% 28,6 . 15
429
. , :
696.000.000429.000.000 267.000.000
III :

0,143

696.000.000

753.294.051,38

696.000.000

57.294.051,38

IV a 24:
57.294.051,38x80,00/ 4.583.524.110,4
V : 65%
,
.25
23

.. 2006. 2007.
83.646.477 80.642.355 .
24
( 2007.)
80,00 .
25
2007. ,
810.000, 30% (180.000 ). :
, 30% .

243

Acta Economica

,
, ,
.

,
:
.
,
.
,
.

.

.

. ,
,
,
,
CAPM.
.
,
,
, ,
.
, ,

. ,
.


30%, 20%, . , , . ,
. , ,
.

244

.

,
.

1. rnold, G. Corporate Financial Management. London: Financial Times,

Pitman Publishing. 1998.
2. Bodie, Z.; Kane, A; Marcus, J. A. Investments. New York: McGraw Hill,
Inc, 2004
3. Brealey, R.A.; Myers, S.C. Principles of Corporate Finance. New York:
McGraw Hill, Inc, 1991
4. Brooks, R. Financial Management: Core Concepts. London: Pearson
Education, 2010.
5. Damodaran, A. .
: , 2005.
6. , . () . :
, 2005.
7. , .. . :
, 2008.
8. , . . :
, 2001.
9. , . . :
, 2005.
10. Parino, R.; Kidwelll, D. Fundamentals of Corporate Finance. New
York: John Wiley& Sons, Inc, 2009.
11. , .; , .. , .
: , 2005
12. , ; , .. . : , 1986.
13. , .; , . . :
, 2008.
14. Clark, J. Francis. Management of Investments. New York: McGraw Hill,
1993.
15. www.efnfak.ni.ac.rs
16. www. prsgroup.com

245