This model proved to be viable for

This model proved to be viable for several years as short-term funding could be rolled- over on normal terms. However, the LPHI risk in this strategy was a combination of three particular risks: (1) the bank or its conduits would be unable to roll-over maturing funding, (2) the cost of such funding would rise relative to the yield on mortgage loans

that it kept on the balance sheet and not securitised, i.e. it would be forced to pay some form of “penalty” interest rate, and (3) that it would be unable to securitise those mortgage assets that it intended to. The LPHI risk was, therefore, that it would be either unable to roll-over its short-term funding in the event of a serious liquidity squeeze or that the necessary roll-over funding could only be secured at high interest rates.

Results (English) 3:

这一模式被证明是可行的，几年的短期资金可以滚动，在正常条件下。然而，在这一战略的风险是lphi组合三特定风险：（1）银行或其导管无法周转到期资金，（2）这样的融资成本将上升，相对于抵押贷款

产量它保留在资产负债表上，没有证券化，即它将被迫支付某种形式的“惩罚”利率，和（3），它将无法提供这些抵押贷款资产，它打算。该lphi风险，因此，这将是在一个严重的流动性挤压事件的情况下，要么无法滚动其短期资金，或是必要的资金周转，只能抵押在高利率。