Archive - Aug 2013

Confused by all the trial balloons, meandering daily Op-Eds (most of which written by novice journalists with even more bizarre agendas), and "paddy power" market updates? Then here is Scotiabank's Guy Hasselman with his latest rundown on just where we stand in the race for the next Fed chairman.

That S&P500 revenues are contracting for the second quarter in a row (i.e. a revenue recession) is by now well-known even to CNBC. This is just as we predicted in June of last year, because in a world devoid of growth capital expenditures (and judging by the amount of train, plane and other crashes lately, maintenance capex as well), there can be no organic growth.What, however, may come as a surprise to the market cheerleaders (who unknowingly, or knowingly, are merely cheering Ben Bernanke's magic bubble blowing machine, see final chart) is that that other key component of bottom line improvement, profit margins, are not only not at record highs contrary to what conventional wisdom may incorrectly believe, but have been consistently sliding for three years now, and while earnings margins are 'only' back to June 2011 levels at 8.7%, it is the far more critical Operating Margin which has tumbled in the past two years after peaking in Q3 2011 and is now back down to 8.4%, a level not seen since mid-2010.

Many high profile investors, economists and companies got burned during China's recent woes. We look at the errors they made and what you can learn from them.

On August 6th, the small town of Deer Trail, Colorado is set to vote on an ordinance that will permit the hunting of unmanned surveillance drones. The author of the ordinance, Phillip Steel, claims the gesture is “symbolic.” A handful of other American states are pursuing measures to limit the spying operations of Uncle Sam’s unmanned aerial vehicles. One has to be either lying or painfully ignorant to believe government will not abuse surveillance drones. State officials have rarely failed to use their capacity to terrify the populace. The prospect of around-the-clock surveillance is a chilling thought and one that should not be taken lightly. Unfortunately the only means to achieve some semblance of privacy requires a luddite approach to technology and a hermit’s approach to community. Otherwise, you avail yourself to the terror of visibility in what should otherwise be, in Thomas Paine’s words, the blessing of society.

It started moments after the release of the Federal Reserve’s latest decision on interest rates. Even though officially they announced maintaining the same policies of low rates and Quantitative Easing, it was a single word change in the official text of their press release from the prior month that sent shockwaves around the world and changed everything forever...

It's real simple, kids.  Consensus: we're Scrooged.

Discussion of recent and prospective price action in the foreign exchange market.

Now that Edward Snowden has been granted temporary asylum in Russia and he has been allowed to leave the airport, things are starting to hot up between the US and Russia. 

In an important diversion from a pure markets focus, Marc Faber outlines his concerns and hopes for the "economic battle between the US and China," noting that as the gap between the Western world and the US narrows so "through trading links, [China] has more and more influence," especially (he adds) in Africa. His biggest fear, and one stoked every day, is that if the Chinese economy slows down meaningfully, they will depreciate their currency, leaving the world's largest economies "in a mode of protectionism - not just through import quotas - but through currency manipulation." And for now Russia is happy just tp upset the US via diplomatic means, but, Faber warns, should we see commodity prices slide further, low growth in Russia may prompt further actions - especially given US interference in markets and politics.

The problem is clear; every level of government has promised too much and is now faced with the politically unappealing prospect of either drastically increasing taxes for the working age population or significantly reducing benefits for the retired (or future retired). As evidenced by the Detroit bankruptcy, the longer we wait, the worse it will get. The greater the delay, the more pain and suffering citizens will face when the benefits and safety nets they have come to expect from the government suddenly disappear. Over time, politicians from all stripes have proven adept at cognitive dissonance, but these increases in taxes and cuts to benefits will have to happen, one way or another; it is just a matter of time.

Just about a year ago we questioned the "demographic demand" thesis for why the US housing 'recovery' would become self-sustaining and lead to yet another fiscal and monetary 'nirvana'. However, while the 'household formation' meme remains front-and-center among bloviating Fed apologists; the sad facts are that not only is household formation actually still falling but, as a recent Pew Research study finds, a record 21 million young adults are now living at home with their parents.

It's not just the level of actual credit being lent that is the problem, it's the patterned behavior tied to the hubris of rallies that allows people to rationalizing borrowing without the liquid assets to back it up.

Greed; corporate arrogance; lobbying influence; excessive leverage; accounting tricks to hide debt; lack of transparency; off balance sheet obligations; mark to market accounting; short-term focus on profit to drive compensation; failure of corporate governance; as well as auditors, analysts, rating agencies and regulators who were either lax, ignorant or complicit. This laundry list of causes has often been used to describe what went wrong in the credit crunch crisis of 2008-2010. Actually these terms were equally used to describe what went wrong with Enron more than twenty years ago. Both crises resulted in what at the time was the biggest bankruptcy in U.S. history — Enron in December 2001 and Lehman Brothers in September 2008. Naturally, this leads to the question that despite all the righteous indignation in the wake of Enron's failure did we really learn or change anything?

Should we throw logic out the window and run with the bulls?