Rosenberg

Zero Hedge fully endorses David Rosenberg's latest call: Ban The Bailout

First we have governments bailing out banks (and auto companies and mortgage providers), homeowner debtors, and now we have governments bailing out governments. When does someone finally say — enough is enough!
Look, Greece is not going to “fail”. They are going to default. There will be a debt restructuring. And there will be some recovery. Bondholders will take a haircut — why shouldn’t they? Why should Angela Merkel care if German banks own Greek bonds? Greece has been in default in its recent 200-year history almost half the time. So has most of Latin America come to think of it. What about Russia?

The drama continues following S&P’s slice to Greece’s debt rating (to junk status of BB+, a three-notch decline, which prompted a surge in 2-year bond yields to a Zeus-like 15%) and the two-notch decline to Portugal’s rating, to A- from A+. The Euro has bounced back this morning and the flight to higher quality German and French bonds has partly reversed course as the markets are swirling with speculation that the IMF is about to announce a stepped-up aid package (yet again!) and the ECB’s Trichet (“Mr. Euro” himself) is set to make a trip to Berlin to meet with German parliamentarians today. (In the U.S., the huge rally in Treasuries has subsided too as the bond market braces for $42 billion of fresh 5-year T-notes today). JGBs have rallied all the way to four-month lows, in terms of yield, to 1.28% — talk about a switch to defense (not to mention a slap in the face to the conventional wisdom that JGBs are an accident waiting to happen)

A great overview of the arguments on either side of the great Treasury bull-bear debate, courtesy of David Rosenberg. Rosie juxtaposes the perspectives of two of the most respect yields strategists currently: MS' Jim Caron, and Goldman's Jan Hatzius. A dose of Jim Grant is also thrown in for good measure. Must read summary for bond bulls and bears alike.

Today Rosenberg releases yet another piece that scratches the veneer off the government "data" and finds that the less presentable truth is always beyond just skin deep.

In one of the most erudite, intelligent, and insightful conversations on the Bond bull/bear debate, David Rosenberg and Jim Grant go all out at each other, trading blows in this "Great Debate" which is a must see by all. As we pointed out yesterday, Grant is very bearish on bonds, and in a self-made prospectus has decided to downgrade the US, since the rating agencies, which have long been thoroughly incompetent, corrupt and afraid to disturb the status quo, will not do so until it is too late. Jim's point is simple: you can't resolve massive debt with more debt, and says Treasuries, which he calls "certificates of confiscation" are a surefire way to lose one's money. He points to the record supply of US Treasuries, makes fun of the SEC (who doesn't), and in a stunning move, cautions the Fed Chairman, whose ongoing dollar debasement, was once considered treason by the US. His conclusion: "watch your back, Ben Bernanke. Cycles turn" could not have come at a more opportune time. As a contrarian, Rosenberg discusses the McKinsey report looking at sovereign debt, and the Reinhart and Rogoff studies on debt default and highlights that there is a major disconnect between theoretical applications of sovereign default models and practice: in essence the US is still deleveraging as private debt is decreasing and public debt is surging but to a slower degree. In essence, David claims, the second largest monthly debt issuance in March of $333 billion is merely a side effect of ongoing deleveraging, which is a leading and/or coincident indicator of deflation: an environment in which the long bond thrives (Japan is a good reference point).

In his piece today, Rosenberg analyzes the increasing lumpiness of volatility in the secular market, observing an increasing performance variation as the duration of major market moves is reduced, while the delta from the flatline keeps growing. Ironically this is happening even as implied correlation drifts lower over time. And even as all eagerly await to see just what the financial regulation overhaul will look like, Rosie observes that the market is now experiencing "intense volatility that has been and continues to be nurtured by government policy." As we shift to a market which is backstopped by taxpayers holdings of assets on which even the FASB encouraged informational opacity, one wonders just what is the real value of information that prices now convey?

David Rosenberg, and several other economists, as well as Steve Liesman, share their first perspectives on the sudden (yet oh so "telegraphed") discount rate hike. David can not be too happy as a tightening policy will likely not be very beneficial to a dated-Treasury long position. The question that everyone is grappling with: if this is a first step to "normalization", with every aspect of the market being abnormal, just how far will the Fed really go?

Investors are growing more risk averse as they question the macroeconomic outlook as the government withdraws its support. Moreover, as last year’s sugar high continues to wear off, what we can expect to see is a return to what can only be described as heightened volatility in the markets, and the need to shift towards less cyclical and more defensive and income-oriented strategies that work well in a period of increased economic uncertainty. Overall, if the primary trend for the economy, credit and equity prices is down and 2009 was indeed a countertrend bounce, then the appropriate exercise is to consider ways to capitalize on the spectacular rally in risk assets off the lows last March and determine how we can all still make money in 2010 on a risk adjusted basis.- David Rosenberg

Here we are, 2½ years into the global credit crunch and investors are still salivating over bailout prospects — the chatter is that the troubled European countries, Greece in particular, is on the precipice of receiving such a package, primarily, it seems, in the form of German loan guarantees. So, what we see today is Greek bond yields plunging and German bund yields on the rise. Great deal for the German taxpayer, don’t you think? Maybe it should be the Deutschland that plans an exit strategy (Martin Wolf’s column in today’s FT, and its dire conclusion, is worth reading — “a currency union whose core country not only exports deflation but also stands aside as members collapse is in deep trouble”). Investors seem to be believe that such a lifeline is being made available because the cost of insuring Greek bonds against default (CDS spreads) have collapsed 36bps, to 343bps (and down 15bps for Portugal, to 189bps since one bailout will most certainly beget another — this is a classic example of PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece, and Spain) lining up at the trough). - David Rosenberg

While nothing new to constant Zero Hedge readers, Rosenberg's recap in a few simple paragraphs of what is happening in the European periphery, the EMU, and with sovereign balance sheets is a must read for all recent entrants into fundamental sovereign default analysis.

I went for a 5km run at the club I recently joined (I aim to lose 30 pounds ASAP just to get back to being fat again, and the 30 pounds after that will finally take me back to my college days). Fast Money came on the tube and it was almost laughable to see them all grappling for the reasons why the selloff occurred. China here. Greece there. No, sorry. Remember Bob Farrell’s eleventh rule: “it’s the news that makes the market; not the other way around.” - David Rosenberg

Rosie already shared some insights on last week's blockbuster GDP number. Today, he refuses to leave the topic alone, and warns investors to "expect big-time [downward] revisions." Additionally, and more relevantly, the entire validity of the economic reporting segment of the administration is put into ever greater question, and with good reason: "if you believe that GDP result, then you de facto are of the view that all of a sudden, with no capital deepening or major technological change in the past half decade to speak of, the potential growth rate in the United States has reached an epic scale of 7%." And this key reading into the divergence between pumped-up and real revenue growth "When one weighs in a zero Fed funds rate, $862 billion in “stimulus” (and counting) and $700 billion in bank and auto sector bailouts, sales should be running at a 10% clip by now — not 1.7%." With economic data increasingly unreliable (to keep it politically correct), and China having the ability to make or break the U.S., what is the point of continuing the charade that the U.S. is nothing more than an extension of the Chinese experiment across the Pacific.

"The GDP number today represented not just a rare but an unprecedented event, and as such, we are willing to treat the report with an entire saltshaker — a few grains won’t do." David Rosenberg

The last time we had a sudden and unexpected turnover at the Fed was back on June 2, 1987 when Paul Volcker surprisingly announced his resignation. That day, the S&P 500 slipped 0.5%, which was a big deal then since we were in the throes of a major rally, the yield the 10-year note surged 27 basis points, the VIX index jumped 5%, the DXY was crushed 1.2% and gold rallied 1.3%. Keep that in your back pocket just in case.

"The consensus sees $76 operating EPS for the S&P 500 in 2010, which would be a 36% increase from 2009
Meanwhile, the consensus basically sees 4% nominal GDP growth for 2010, which would suggest a 10% profit rise in 2010, which would imply a solid but somewhat less exuberant $62 EPS call for the year. Remember that this time last year the consensus was at $77 operating EPS for 2009 and we got $56 — what saved the market was the Geithner & Bernanke show. What do they do for an encore this year?

Forget all the calculations off the “artificial” March lows. Forget the 25% slide in the first 10 weeks of the year to that awful trough. Here is the reality. The S&P 500, from point to point, rallied 23% in 2009 even though earnings for the year as whole came in a whopping $22 a share or 27% below what was being priced in at the start of the year. Now that is remarkable. It almost wants to make you believe in the tooth fairy." - David Rosenberg