- no, not a new comedy double-act, but an annoyingly childish phrase coined by the string-driven thing himself, the BBC's business editor, Robert Peston (aka, in our household at least, as Pesto).
The current economic situation has already spawned a host of annoying jargon - 'credit crunch' for instance. Then we had the stupidly named 'toxic assets' for poorly-rated bundles of USA subprime mortgages. But Mr P has to go one better - I have heard him twice now interviewed about these, and calling them 'stinky assets'.
It's all very well inventing terms for financial instruments that are so complex that even hedge fund managers don't really understand them (Collateralised Debt Obligations or CDOs). But to resort to puerile terms more suited to name calling in the playground is surely a step too far, even for the dumbed-down Beeb? What is wrong with 'dodgy assets' - a term that is already in common use and conveys perfectly the lack of trust in these items?
menhir
I agree with you about the impenetrable terminology, otherwise known as jargon, devised as a shorthand for the cognoscenti (those in the trade). 'Leverage' is another one that I think is definitely a misnomer, purposely coined to 'confuddle' methinks.
Stinky assets I don't mind. I heard a couple of Peston's explanatory discussions in which he used the description. I really do think the vocabulary, in this case, does convey exactly what the assets are in the present hot financial climate. They do metaphorically stink. Personally, I think 'toxic' is too much of refinement, one which reduces the impact (probably on purpose) of the not just risky, but downright dangerous financial games the banking and financial industry have indulged in. It is time, in my view, that some of this veiling terminology was revised.
I don't see the language of the analysis as a dumbing down this time, I hear something that really does convey a blunt clear description and real message. It's a bit of plain speaking, at last.