This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

US Retail Sales Just Barely Beat Expectations, Come At 0.4%, On 0.3% Consensus, Previous Revised Lower

Tyler Durden's picture




 

US Retail Sales came essentially in line with consensus at 0.4% versus expectations of 0.3%. As usual, the downward prior revision game continues, as the previous number was revised from 0.4% to 0.3%. And once the latest number is revised lower again next month the impact on the market will be actually positive as the next month once again come better then "prior." Retails sales came in at 0.6% on expectations of 0.3%, with the previous also getting revised lower to 0.1% from 0.2%. And auto sales dropped both M/M and Y/Y.

From the Census report:

The U.S. Census Bureau announced today that advance estimates of U.S. retail and food services sales for August, adjusted for seasonal variation and holiday and trading-day differences, but not for price changes, were $363.7 billion, an increase of 0.4 percent (±0.5%)* from the previous month, and 3.6 percent (±0.5%) above August 2009. Total sales for the June through August 2010 period were up 4.7 percent (±0.3%) from the same period a year ago. The June to July 2010 percent change was revised from +0.4 percent (±0.5%)* to +0.3 percent (±0.2%).

Retail trade sales were up 0.5 percent (±0.5%)* from July 2010, and 3.7 percent (±0.7%) above last year. Nonstore retailers sales were up 10.5 percent (±2.8%) from August 2009 and gasoline stations sales were up 9.6 percent (±1.8%) from last year. 

And once again, government data disagrees with official polling: According to Gallup, consumer spending declined 5.9% on the 14 Day Rolling Average in August from July, and 7.2% on the 3 DRA. We wonder who is making numbers up again...

 

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Tue, 09/14/2010 - 08:47 | 580292 Ivanovich
Ivanovich's picture

Why aren't the algos pumping ES higher with "better than expected" data?

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 08:58 | 580305 French Frog
French Frog's picture

Muted reaction so far;

Euro ZEW survey come in at -4.4 vs expectation of +10 so this is possibly weighting on ES or maybe it's the first sign of negative market reaction to slightly positive data (as portrayed by the figures)...

One can dream...

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:05 | 580317 dcb
dcb's picture

I have posted a number of charts on ths  site, but making ameasured move from the bottm trned line we should be due for a pullback.

in addition we have end of quarter window dressing to take care of.

the fed programs were put into effect tomake sure we breached a certain trend line, becasue other wise we continued on the down trend. you will see fed efforts to keep us above that baseline trend.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 08:47 | 580293 The Axe
The Axe's picture

back to school should have given this number a boost!!  But autos have hit another rough patch..time for Clunkers2

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 08:51 | 580296 knukles
knukles's picture

Thought we already had that in DC; 2 Clunkers, Executive and Legislative.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:05 | 580318 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

A sequel never does wel. We need something else.

I propose this:

FREE UPGRADES

For example: You turn in a Ford Focus and YOU GET A MUSTANG

I think it could work.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 10:54 | 580612 Village Idiot
Village Idiot's picture

"For example: You turn in a Ford Focus and YOU GET A MUSTANG

I think it could work."

 

I could get behind this one. Especially if they open it up to trucks, Ford Superduty being the best. Chevy and Dodge, meh.

*truck baiter*

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:20 | 580341 Id fight Gandhi
Id fight Gandhi's picture

Don't you love how they spun thar as a go green, trade in for a high mpg car. People ended up getting new f150s

Btw trucks aren't evil. Real people do real work with them.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 08:48 | 580294 newstreet
newstreet's picture

Sell Euros.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 08:49 | 580295 Pillage
Pillage's picture

"And once again, government data disagrees with official polling"

If you're the goverment in a pre election month and you've tweaked the other data then why skip over tweaking retail sales.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:00 | 580309 MarketFox
MarketFox's picture

Retail does nothing until wages increase....

And THIS does not happen until some time after the debt destruction process....

 

Long slog ahead....because govt. policy is just the opposite.....The Princeton Harvard Yale team just are not capable in their ability to understand the proper road to recovery....which means progress will not happen until THEY are removed from their positions of influence....

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:00 | 580312 Fourth Horseman...
Fourth Horseman of the Apocalypse's picture

The data does not make sense.  Census Bureau claims auto sales were down 1% YoY and less than 1% MoM when we know from the auto makers that sales were down over 20% YoY and 5% MoM.  

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:04 | 580316 old_turk
old_turk's picture

So POMO days ad infinitum?

Certainly appears that way.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:16 | 580333 dvsteenk
dvsteenk's picture

once again previous months data are adjusted to make current month look better than expected. Transferring 0.1% from July to August: not only this makes it look as an improvement (0.3% to 0.4%, while July was at 0.4%), it also makes it beat the consensus of 0.3%. How obvious.

Moreover, what are we talking about: 0.1% changes... What's the error margin on that survey? 

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:17 | 580338 Id fight Gandhi
Id fight Gandhi's picture

Consumer reports (the magazine) retail sales gauge was just on cnbs. Hanes ripped her apart saying they've only done it for a year how reliable is it compared to the retail sales number.

Anyone follow this?

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:22 | 580346 Pillage
Pillage's picture

yeah, Hanes is a lawyer......so naturally he's going to blow off anything that isn't older than his underwear....just shows though, the government data doesn't match. Will there be a diminished impact on the psychie of investors to government data in the future?

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:23 | 580347 wang
wang's picture

have a look at the non-seasonally adjusted numbers month over month

 

http://www.census.gov/retail/marts/www/marts_current.html

 

August 2010 ~ 371,773   

July 2010 ~ 372,679

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:30 | 580378 Pillage
Pillage's picture

Seasonal adjustments added in the usual back to school gain. Without the adjustment the number is down.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 12:39 | 580952 Biggvs
Biggvs's picture

Seasonal adjustments for this report subtract for back-to-school sales, to smooth the numbers. Without seasonal adjustments the number is higher. Non-adjusted figure is 371,733. Seasonally adjusted figure is 363,704.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:24 | 580348 Thomas
Thomas's picture

'but not for price changes"?

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:24 | 580353 firstdivision
firstdivision's picture

Well, I got my call on BBY wrong.  What I am amazed is that futures are down.  Did the Fed feel that todays numbers were good enough for them to do nothing?

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:43 | 580409 Id fight Gandhi
Id fight Gandhi's picture

Read bby a bit. Same stores down, big ticket down, I was WTF.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 23:58 | 582503 firstdivision
firstdivision's picture

Well my call was BBY would just miss on EPS and that revenues would be down.  Forgot that patriotizing from other denominations to a shitty dollar would help.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 09:50 | 580429 Id fight Gandhi
Id fight Gandhi's picture

They say the zew numbers on level with feb09 aren't helping which is why gold is up.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 10:10 | 580478 docj
docj's picture

Here's the bottom line from the data in the report - everything you need (food, clothing) is more expensive while anything you want after taking care of your needs (iPads) is less expensive, but still can't be afforded because you're out of money.

Awesome.

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 11:34 | 580741 rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

According to the government website, the estimated "increase" in retail sales does not account for price increases.

"The advance estimates are based on a subsample of the Census Bureau's full retail and food services sample. A stratified random sampling method is used to select approximately 5,000 retail and food services firms whose sales are then weighted and benchmarked ...

Estimates adjusted for seasonal variation, holiday, and trading-day differences, but not for price changes."

http://www.census.gov/retail/marts/www/retail.html

 

 

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 11:34 | 580743 rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

According to the government website, the estimated "increase" in retail sales does not account for price increases.

"The advance estimates are based on a subsample of the Census Bureau's full retail and food services sample. A stratified random sampling method is used to select approximately 5,000 retail and food services firms whose sales are then weighted and benchmarked ...

Estimates adjusted for seasonal variation, holiday, and trading-day differences, but not for price changes."

http://www.census.gov/retail/marts/www/retail.html

 

 

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 11:35 | 580750 rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

According to the government website, the estimated "increase" in retail sales does not account for price increases.

"The advance estimates are based on a subsample of the Census Bureau's full retail and food services sample. A stratified random sampling method is used to select approximately 5,000 retail and food services firms whose sales are then weighted and benchmarked ...

Estimates adjusted for seasonal variation, holiday, and trading-day differences, but not for price changes."

http://www.census.gov/retail/marts/www/retail.html

 

 

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 11:43 | 580770 rwe2late
rwe2late's picture

apologize for the duplicate posts,

slowwww connection

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 11:44 | 580777 glenlloyd
glenlloyd's picture

Gallup's rolling average seems to be headed downward....very slowly.

 

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 14:27 | 581304 sbenard
sbenard's picture

Just got this tweet from Platts:

US retail gasoline sales fell 3.2% over the survey week ending September 10 to 61.857 million barrels, MasterCard SpendingPulse data shows

Apparently, retail sales ain't so rosey after all!

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 15:43 | 581480 Battleaxe
Battleaxe's picture

Sales could keep coming in at an intitial .4% number, be revised down to .3%, so would average a .1% increase MOM even though it really isn't going anywhere.

 

Tue, 09/14/2010 - 16:51 | 581680 Djirk
Djirk's picture

curious to see how much was volume vs price growth?

Inflation driven spending growth?

GDP bitchez!

 

 

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!