Bank of America
People Powered Privacy Savior ... Or Honey Trap Pushed By the Central Banks and TBTF?
— Microsoft (@Microsoft) February 4, 2014
There is one main reason why complacency is bad: selloffs. Because as Bank of America explains, in an environment in which there are "too few bears", and where investors are "not prepared for a downside correction", when you do finally get a sell off for whatever reason, with nobody hedged and otherwise prepared for such an outcome, the only logical continuation is piling on until one gets selling exhaustion. And in a world in which hedge fund leverage is about 500%, by the time exhaustion comes, there will be very few left standing.
According To Bank Of America The Outlook For The Entire World Has "Deteriorated" Due To Cold US WeatherSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 02/03/2014 14:56 -0400
It really doesn't get funnier than this, and explains the 7 figure comp for the Bank of America authors who can certainly get matching compensation in the comedy circuit. From BofA's Naeem Wahid:
We recommend closing the short EUR/SEK trade that we initiated last week. While Swedish economic data have improved, as we expected, the global outlook has deteriorated – caused by a larger than expected weather effect in the US (the US ISM has fallen to 51.3, from December’s 56.5). As such we close out the trade at 8.8300 (entered at 8.8100) and look to reinitiate once risk appetite turns positive again.
In other words, the outlook for the global economy - that would be the economy of the entire world - has just taken a hit due to cold weather and snowfall during the US winter.... ..... .....
Following today's crash in the US Manufacturing ISM, we now have the following snapshot of global manufacturing: only three countries are currently in contraction (sub 50 PMI) mode: Australia, Russia and France. Look for many more to join them if today's US print is a harbinger of things to come to the global manufacturing space.
A classicial economist... and Harvard professor... preaching to the world that one's money is not safe in the US banking system due to Ben Bernanke's actions? And putting his withdrawal slip where his mouth is and pulling $1 million out of Bank America? Say it isn't so...
"Where's the bounce," asks (rhetorically) Bank of America's Macneil Curry, warning that despite the repeated signals that investor anxiety is at unsustainable levels and that this is a late stage "risk off" environment, given the blow off top conditions in several EM currencies, particularly $/TRY, and extreme readings in SPX volatility, with the VXV/VIX ratio recently breaking below 1, the S&P500 can't maintain a bid. "Risk assets are vulnerable," he concludes...
Below is a chart which flags the highest external risk among the 10 most prominent EMs broken down by liquidity (reserves over near-term maturities) on the X-axis and capital flows (current account as % of GDP) on the Y-axis. It should come as no surprise, that Turkey is worst, followed by South Africa, India and Indonesia. China, Korea and Russia have current account surpluses and strong coverage of short-term debt by reserves. Brazil also has high reserve coverage of short-term debt. Mexico and Poland have small current account deficits and healthy reserve coverage, in addition to their IMF Flexible Credit Lines. As for Argentina, forgetabout it.
So far in 2013, Bank of America lost money on 9 trading days out of a total 188. Statistically, this result is absolutely ridiculous when one considers that the bulk of bank trading revenues are still in the form of prop positions disguised as "flow" trading to evade Volcker which means the only way a bank could make money with near uniform perfection is if it either i) consistently has inside information that it trades on or ii) it consistently front-runs its clients (the latter incidentally was a topic we covered back in 2009 relating to Goldman Sachs, and which the bank sternly rejected). We now know that when it comes to Bank of America at least one of the two happened.
Bank of America Head Technician: "Our Bullish View Is Invalidated, Going Neutral; Below 1806 Spells Trouble"Submitted by Tyler Durden on 01/24/2014 11:42 -0400
Yesterday's BofA's MacNeill Curry warned that once above $1270, gold becomes "explosive" as the squeeze trap slams shut, which explains why the shorts are desperately defending the critical resistance redline. Today, the chief technician of Bank of Countrywide Lynch looks at the two other key correlation pairs: the S&P500 (via the Emini ESH4) and the USDJPY, which by virtue of being the key funding pair determines the price of risk in virtually every corner of the globe. He is not too happy with what he sees.
China faces a very significant test of its reform policy pursuit rhetoric. With China's Bank regulator set to issue an alert on coal-industry loans - "as a result of outout cuts, they don't have much cash flow and thus they can't repay loans and debt," the massive growth in wealth products such as the CEG#1 (which offered a 10% yield for a 3 year term) based on these loans leaves the Chinese with a moral hazard dilemma - bailout or no bailout. ICBC has made it clear it wil not bailout investors since reputational damage would be "well manageable," and former-PBOC adviser Li Daokui adds that "a controlled default is much better than no default," noting critically that trust defaults "will teach future investors a very important lesson." Belief that contagion can be "contained" brings back memories of 2008 in the US but a total (or even partial) bailout will merely increase the leverage and risk-taking problem and signal government talk of policy reform is not real.
"Gold gets explosive above 1270. Watch out. With the US $ coming under pressure, the potential further gold gains is high and rising. 1270 IS KEY. A break of the 1270 pivot should be the catalyst for short squeeze higher, exposing the confluence of resistance between 1362/1399."
Following last night's surprise event, which was China's HSBC PMI dropping into contraction territory for the first time since July, which in turn sent Asian market into a tailspin, the most relevant underreported news was a speech by International Monetary Fund Deputy Managing Director Naoyuki Shinohara who said that "As long as steady progress is being made toward the 2% target, we do not see a need for additional monetary accommodation in Japan." He added that while exit from unconventional monetary policy "is still very likely some way off for the euro area and Japan, I believe that the moment to start planning is now." This warning - an echo of prcisely what we said yesterday - promptly roiled the Yen, sending it far higher and sending the EMini futures sliding by over 10 tick in no time: a drop from which they have not recovered yet.
After five years of aggressive Federal Reserve and government intervention in our monetary and financial systems, it's time to ask: Where are we? The "plan," such as it has been, is to let future growth sweep everything under the rug. To print some money, close their eyes, cross their fingers, and hope for the best. On that, we give them an "A" for wishful thinking – and an "F" for actual results. If we take a closer look at the projections, the idea that we're going to grow – even remotely – into a gigantic future that will consume all entitlement shortfalls within its cornucopian maw becomes all but laughable. Of course, the purpose of this exercise is not to make fun of anyone, nor to mock any particular beliefs, but to create an actionable understanding of the true nature of where we really are and what you should be doing about it.
IBM Asian Revenues Crash, Adjusted Earnings Beat On Tax Rate Fudge; Debt Rises 20% To Fund Stock BuybacksSubmitted by Tyler Durden on 01/21/2014 17:40 -0400
Fudging Non-GAAP numbers is nothing new: everyone does it, even if it means that real, operating earnings for IBM (and most other companies) are substantially lower, and sure enough IBM's real EPS was $5.73. But this is just the tip, because one has to look deep into the income statement to find just how it is that IBM, whose pre-tax income actually declined by 11% could post a 14% increase in non-GAAP EPS. The answer: taxes. And just like Bank of America, IBM decided to crater its Q4 tax rate, which was 25.5% in Q4 2012 and in Q4 2013 dropped to... 11.2%. Seriously IBM? Incidentally, this epic accounting gimmick is also why one should look at IBM's revenues which were a debacle: not only did they miss expectations of a $28.3 billion in Q4, printing at $27.7 billion, but were down 5%. And while most revenue items were weak, the piece de resistance was Systems and Tech revenue, which cratered 25%!