Investing lessons to be drawn from "Tower of Basel"
Power accrues to whoever writes the rails (risk weights, eligibility, identity, provenance).
I am referring to the book “Tower of Basel“ by Adam Lebor.
A) Core Laws (what the book actually reveals)
Centralize the switch, decentralize the optics
Reality: Bank for International Settlements (BIS) = club of clubs. Decisions at a small core; legitimacy theater pushed to national Central Banks.
Rule: Keep one coordination switch above the nation-state (swap lines, settlement, standards). Push “independence” messaging down.
Write the scoring system, not the speeches
Reality: Basel risk weights and eligibility lists decide who gets infinite bid.
Rule: If you set the weights, you set the world’s portfolio.
Sanctuary for the few → discipline for the many
Reality: Discretion/exemptions at the apex; rules for everyone else.
Rule: Soft law for systemic insiders, hard law for the periphery.
Stability through selective opacity
Reality: Timed, partial disclosure lowers blow-back and preserves room to maneuver.
Rule: Publish enough to look legitimate; conceal enough to be effective.
Standardize the rails, localize the blame
Reality: Templates written transnationally; heat absorbed nationally.
Rule: Synchronize by committees, not treaties; implementation pain is a local story.
Crisis is a coordination instrument
Reality: Centralization jumps after shocks; rules ratchet, sunsets slip.
Rule: Keep crises short enough to avoid revolt, long enough to embed rails.
Collateral is sovereignty
Reality: “Good collateral” = who transacts fast.
Rule: Treat collateral taxonomies like constitutional law.
Neutral front, directional outcomes
Reality: Words = “prudential, harmonization”; outcomes funnel to the same instruments.
Rule: Use neutral rhetoric to hide targeted preferences.
Global money ≠ national democracy
Reality: Transnational liquidity can’t be voted on nationally at speed.
Rule: Keep metagovernance offshore; let parliaments debate tax rates.
From clubs to code
Reality: Paper standards are becoming machine-enforceable defaults (IDs, provenance, e-invoicing, KYC schemas).
Rule: If APIs enforce policy, you don’t need police.
B) Today’s Implementations
Programmable money first; CBDC later: tokenized deposits/stablecoins on ID rails normalize controls; CBDC is consolidation.
Identity & provenance as base layers: “admissibility” (signable, revocable, auditable) becomes the moat.
Collateral weaponization: sovereigns top-tier; outside money (gold/Bitcoin) kept capital-expensive/operationally awkward at the core (Store-of-Value niche allowed, Medium-of-Exchange dominance contained).
Crisis cadence: 2–8 week shocks → mandatory standards → panic dialed down after adoption begins.
C) Controller’s Playbook → Investor’s Playbook
Controller knobs → Public signals → Trades
Risk weights / eligibility
→ drafts from BCBS/FSB/IOSCO; identical language across US/EU/UK in weeks
→ Long compliance OS (PLTR/MSFT), Cyber (PANW).Swap-line choreography / facilities
→ weekend communiqués, TGA/RRP/BS moves, bill-vs-coupon pivots
→ Buy fear dips in state-embedded software; fade clarity popsAdmissibility mandates (lineage/provenance/rollback)
→ Requests For Proposal (RFP) verbs: attest, revoke, trace, lineage, rollback
→ Long Palantir (decision provenance), MSFT Purview/Entra, audit-grade cyber (PANW)
D) Alpha Checklist
Policy intent? (drafts, speeches)
Perimeter leverage? (stores, banks, clouds can enforce without law)
Vendor readiness? (shipping knobs: ID, lineage, rollback, audit)
PSC ↑? (Policy Synchronization Coefficient — same rule across allies)
LPI ↑? (Legibility Pressure Index — “attest/revoke/rollback/trace/lineage” in RFPs)
Net Liquidity & issuance mix? (bill-heavy = easier; coupon-heavy + TGA rebuild = headwind)
Who’s the inelastic buyer? (mandates/capital rules)
What can’t be said in an LP memo (e.g. PMs can’t write “we’re buying the substrate of technocracy”)? (buy it)
Which pilot can’t roll back? (ratchet)
Who can change rules mid-game? (own them or their console)
E) Where mispricing persists (and how to front-run)
Tracking-error prisons: active funds can’t size early; you can.
ESG/optics veto: “governance substrate” under-owned; own the thing nobody can name out loud.
Procurement opacity: classified/quiet wins not in models; watch ATO (Authorization to Operate), standards drafts, identical language across regulators.
Forced-seller windows: VaR (Value at Risk) spikes/margin hikes = sell winners first → you provide liquidity to policy-default vendors.
F) Red Flags (for disconfirming checks)
Standards backtracked or court-voided across multiple jurisdictions (rare).
App stores/banks/clouds loosen AUPs (Acceptable Use Policies) simultaneously (opposite of revealed trajectory).
Big buyers fail to renew after pilots in core functions (identity/lineage) — watch renewal length & attach rates.
G) One-Page Summary
Thesis: Power accrues to whoever writes the rails (risk weights, eligibility, identity, provenance).
Mechanism: Soft law + perimeter enforcement + machine-enforced defaults.
Crisis: Short shocks ratchet standards; sunsets slip.
Collateral: Sovereigns crowned; outside money contained (Store-of-Value niche, not Medium-of-Exchange).
Alpha: Buy the rail-writers and knob-sellers (policy-grade software, ID/provenance/payment middleware) before committees and consultants can say it.
My thesis vs LP-memo reality
I can write: “We’re long the substrate of governance — software that turns policy into parameters”.
They must write: “We’re long ethical AI and regulated data platforms”.
Result: under-positioning persists until the standards are ubiquitous and index committees capitulate.
Bottom line
“Tower of Basel” is a manual on how to run a global monetary stack through standards, not slogans. The revealed preference is stable coordination — by writing the rails.
Today, that same logic ported into code (ID, provenance, programmable money) is where most of the value and power accrete.
The alpha is to buy the rail-writers and knob-sellers — the ones whose products make policy self-executing — before it’s polite to say out loud what they actually are.
None of this should be considered investment advice.
