Hugh Hendry Makes Rare Media Appearance, Discusses Greece And Other Cheap Folding Suits

Tyler Durden's picture

The man who singlehandedly took "I would recommend you panic" and made it into one of the catch phrases of the year (if not decade), and who has recently been in a self-imposed media blackout, had a rare media appearance when late last week he appeared on the BBC show The Bottom Line Evan together with Guy Berruyer, chief executive of global business software supplier Sage Group; and internet entrepreneur Brent Hoberman, founder of online interior decoration business Obviously we were mostly interested in what Hugh would say, and luckily he did say quite a lot, if nothing too shocking for those familiar with his generally cheery outlook on the world.  Among the snazzy soundbites was his explanation that the UK is not in a recession, but a depression, something Zero Hedge has been saying about the entire, never mind England, for the past 2.5 years, and the proceeds to give the rational breakdown of the Greek situation, which as everyone knows is that it is purely due to political power grabbing and banker greed and financial innovation allowing the masking of reality. As for the outcome, we all know it: Greece defaults, creditors take major haircuts, speculators get blamed, etc.

Fast forward to 6:30 into the clip for the primary part of Hendry's expostulation.

Bottomline 20110922-2100a by user5452365

And here is another link for those who can not open the SoundCloud rip:

And while he may not have had anything new to add to our outlook on the world, he did have some very entertaining suggestions on grooming for hedge fund managers. Watch those in the clip below.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
lynnybee's picture

O.M.G. !   MY FAVORITE GUY !     ..... if i was just not so old .    

Michael's picture

You'll never be to old Lynnybee.

Silver Bug's picture

Wow the Globe and Mail is up to their garbage again, David Berman a so called "Journalist" writes a pure hit piece on Gold. It is laughable to say the least, and utterly filled with holes. You can see this nonsense linked:

When clowns like this start touting Gold, that is your que to get out of dodge!

DormRoom's picture

his main argument is that people like yourself, say you should buy gold as a hedge against risk, and a stock market crash.  But recently gold has been highly correlated with  declines in equities, and shown to be inconsistent with the aforementioned investment thesis.  So if  gold is no longer  a hedge against risk, why own it.

Spitzer's picture

Gold shot from 1580 to 1900 while world stock markets tumbled. It shot even higher in most other currencies and has not fallen anywhere near those levels even now.

Where you awake that week ?

Gold was up $25 the day of the flash crash on may 6th 2010.

DormRoom's picture

all true, but based on the assumption of the Bernanke put, ie QE infinity.  That assumption has been weakened, and we are now facing a huge prolonged deflationary period, not inflationary.  Gold--being an asset class--will depreciate, like all other asset classes during a deflationary period.


Also, Operation Twist is until June 2012, so you may not see QEx for another year.  Gold & silver will retrace to their 200 weekly DMA-- gold 1200, silver 21, and possibly a lotlower, if it is the case that their price appreciation was due to a speculative-bubble

Whalley World's picture

Have you heard of Exter's deflationary debt pyramid? 

And why again did gold rise from $20 to $35 in the deflationary 30's?

Diogenes's picture

It was manipulated. Franklin D. Roosevelt personally set the price of gold each day, and decided to peg it at $35 up from a starting point of $20.67.

He was deliberately devaluing the US dollar. Since the US was on the gold standard, this meant devaluing against gold.

The result was a flood of gold into the US Treasury from American sellers and gold miners and also foreign sellers especially as Europe ramped up into WW2.

The huge supply of gold amassed by the US between 1933 and 1945, allowed them to inflate the currency with impunity until the gold nearly ran out in 1971.

They did not run out of gold in 71, but at the rate it was leaving it would have been completely gone in another 2 or 3 years.

Dingleberry's picture

Depends on if you are a trader or long termer, for whatever reason.  This appears to be about holding longer term, so I'll make a case for gold. QE or not, that isn't important. What IS important is whether or not uncle Ben will keep interest rates negative (in my view about minus 5% currently).  Lots of folk say that gold isn't a good inflation hedge because while inflation went on thru the 80' and 90's before gold started to pop, I will remind those folks (BECAUSE I WAS THERE), that you GOT PAID REAL INTEREST on your savings back then.  What do you get now? What will you get next year? How about the next???  Gold has been incredibly volatile, but as long as interest rates are this negative, gold has a much more solid floor that anything else you are putting your cash in. Everyone (including widows and orphans) are gamblers now, whether they want to be or not. The days of just stashing cash are over.

Crisismode's picture

Your assumptons are completely fallacious.


As are you.

ManufacturedOpinion's picture

More like FELLATIOUS.  He's too busy sucking cock in the dormroom to have anything REAL to say.

reader2010's picture

Comments like yours reflect the lack of basic understanding of gold, and the basic defnition of inflation and deflation. 

DormRoom's picture

all you gold bugs assume gold to be currency reserve candidate, but never talk about the high probability of SDRs (Special Drawing Rights), that likely will be rebalanced with a basket of current account surplus currencies, taking on that role.


In such a world, gold is a still a barbaric relic (has little use-value, and exchange-value).

Spitzer's picture

The world monetary order has gone from gold to paper back to gold now paper again. Paper produces the typical result which forces gold back into the equation again, for the 7000th year.

reader2010's picture

Fuck their SDR or any other paper sheme. The value of gold doesn't go up or go down because it's measured in content purity and weight. Unless someone discovers a technology that can turn ocean waves into gold without any cost at all, there is no inflation in gold. For those that are too ignorant to understand this basic fact,  they think of gold measured in any fiat. That's their ignorance and illusion. Again, don't value your wealth in any meaningless fiat because the right way is to value that in troy ounces or kilos of gold. 

mfoste1's picture

gold isnt a hedge against risk.....its a hedge against inflation. In a deflationary environment gold gets hammered.


EDIT: i read through the rest of your post and you dont have any clue what youre talking about. You sound like youre just spewing some keynesian bs that a prof taught you.

ItsDanger's picture

A large portion of gold's gains over the past number of yrs is directly due to the USD drop.  Once that has shaken out, gold will resume its climb.  But large gains may be elusive until inflation hits the #'s fed to the sheep.

ManufacturedOpinion's picture

Good fucking Christ dormroom dumbfuck.  Are you really that stupid ???

Let's see ...

2007 Dow 14000, today 11000

2007 Gold 600, today 1600.

Or does 4 years (out of a 5000 year history as money) not count as "recently" to your idiotic pea-brain?

Just how much fiat are your (also stupid) parents paying for your "education" ??

Pull your fucking head out of your asshole before speaking to the grownups you idiot.

Bartanist's picture

Please explain gold in the years surrounding 1980? How is this different? ... this time? I go under the assumption that there are no free markets and everything is manipulated by those who have the power to create fiat. That manipulation will only go away when their power ceases. Can their power really be taken away or would they take your gold first as they have done before?

BigJim's picture

Their manipulation relies on having PMs to manipulate with. As the supply dwindles, their paper games get harder and harder to sustain. We can argue 'when' the games will end, but not 'if'.

As for confiscation - as all money was gold, and the vast majority of citizen's money was in bank vaults, the confiscation was easily effected - the government just seized the contents of bank vaults. Different story now, bucko.

Diogenes's picture

Gold will become obsolete when one or more governments turns honest.

If any country had an honest currency without swindles, games or manipulation the world would flock to it. And say, to hell with gold.

For a while it looked like the swiss franc filled the bill. Before that it was the US dollar, and before that the British pound  which was remarkably stable for 100 years between the Napoleonic Wars and WW1.

The last 2 were backed by gold but that is not absolutely necessary. All that is necessary is for the currency to maintain its purchasing power.

ReallySparky's picture

I think he is hot too, in that nerdy kinda way. Yup this chick digs him!

Crisismode's picture

He only wants women who are of his class.


Anyone with a name of ReallySparky doesn't fit that bill.



RSloane's picture

Yup, he is definately hot.

Id fight Gandhi's picture

Wow deja vu. 2008 all over again.

hungrydweller's picture

Sheesh.  Good thing he doesn't make many media appearances.  Get that man an avatar bag.

Spitzer's picture

Just another Hedgy getting his timing right. The John Paulson of 2011. He is not much of an economist, neither was Paulson.

Lets see how he does in 2014.....

HitTheFan's picture

Is being an economist a factor in investment success then? Every time I look, economists are miles wide of the mark on every measure. Maybe you are an economist?

Nah, Hendry gets it: the world is bust, short the shit out of it.

And buy gold (that is my little tip, for free).

Spitzer's picture

Knowing something about how the economy actually works does go a long way. Warren Buffet knows nothing about economics and he would have went broke in 2008 without the bailouts. Judging by his latest moves, he will go broke anyway.

How many Austrian economists are miles wide?  Marc Faber ? Jim Rogers ?

The world was bust in 2009 and anyone who shorted the shit out of it (Mish Shedlock) got their head knocked off. For all we knew, China could have revalued the RMB and Hendry would have been down 70% rather then up 40.

And buy gold.... I agree, I wonder if Hew does. I have never heard anything Austrian come out of his mouth.

Crisismode's picture

Spitzer, sometimes you say things that are insightful.


Sometimes you say things that are foolish.


This time . . . .




You are wrong.

Diogenes's picture

Apparently if you want to be large you have to be batshit crazy and a total asshole.

snowball777's picture

Let's see how your zooro long malarkey is in 2014....that is if the currency lasts until then. LOL

Spitzer's picture

Lets see what the dollar looks like in 2014.

The US has 50 billion in forex reserves. Enough to cover one months trade deficit. California is in the same shape as Greece, the only diffrence is California is the biggest state in the dollar bloc.

And they say "the USD is the least worst of the fiat currencies" hahaha.

snowball777's picture

Lets see what the Drachma looks like in 2014.

Some other "differences":

- California has a $2T SDP to Greece's GDP of $0.3T and dropping

- California has 2X the GDP per capita of Greece

- California UE 12.1% Greece? 16.6% and climbing

- California 30yr bond yields 5.25%, Greece? 9.75%

"Same shape"? Hahaha. Have some more ouzo!


Spitzer's picture

The US numbers are cooked big-time compared to EuroStat yet that ^ is the best you could come up with ?


So Greece is liquidating debt, cutting spending and the ECB is raising interest rates. While Calerfornia is running up the US trade deficit, increasing spending and adding debt while the FED cuts interest rates.

Greece and the Euro are miles ahead of the Cali and the dollar.


snowball777's picture

"Raising" huh?

Jan. 1.00 2.00 - 3.00

Jul. 0.75 1.50 - 2.25

"Increasing spending" huh?

2009 $446B

2010 $403B

2011 $404B

"Liquidating debt" huh?

"Greece’s debt is forecast to peak at 161 percent of gross domestic product next year, according to European Commission data released on July 4.

Venizelos said the economy will shrink more than 4.5 percent this year."

You're a funny guy, Spitz. I'll give you that much.

DormRoom's picture

Hugh, "I shorted your grandchildren's future" Hendry.  His fund is up 40% yoy, from his Chinese CDS plays.  But you shouldn't short a country that has more PHds working in its federal government, particularly the finance dept, than most of the world combine.

snowball777's picture

"Piled higher and deeper", as they say in academia.

agent default's picture

"But you shouldn't short a country that has more PHds working in its federal government, particularly the finance dept, than most of the world combine."

No, that's exactly the thing you want to short the hell out of.  It is the country that is run by people who had to run a small business that you DO NOT want to short.  An elusive entity these days unfortunately.

snowball777's picture

Because everyone knows huge economies are exactly like selling retail goods at a mark-up, performing a well-defined service for a small set of customers, or doing ridiculously simple books with Quicken.


DrunkenMonkey's picture

You miss the point that as they are closer to their customers, they understand human nature / behaviour better.

snowball777's picture

No, I get that, it's the applicability of that knowledge beyond their tiny sphere of influence that makes the logic completely flawed. And there's more to human behavior than business (although not for many small business owners).

bankruptcylawyer's picture

he's trying to say jim chanos is smarter shorting china or other brics in a strategic manner than the  mohammed el arian, oh i'm sorry bill gross, is shorting treasuries. 


and.........i think he was right. 


he's talking about shorting bonds when he says countries ....NOT .....equities per se. dummy. 


and he's been right. because developing countries alrready printed their way into this mess and are now paying for it ( russia, argentina, mexico---yes they ALL had inflation crisis in the past 10 years)----brazil might be different, but the phd countries of the u.s. and germany ---their yields have only gone down. 

and i think he's correct in saying they will continue to print ( yields go down ) their debt (treasuries) into becoming equities ( cash money supply yielding zero perpetually)

( bonds yielding zero percent indefinitley are dollars---and if you think of the money supply as the main asset of the central bank, then cash is the equity side of the asset and bonds the debt side. , of course precious meetals would be the negative interest side of the asset  unless you could figure out a way to make the metals pay you interest (enough to cover cost of warehousing plus  interest profit--- by lending them out multiple times to CME primary dealer warehouses that will then financialize them in a paper confetti market 99% never delivered ( futures.) ---- ) . 

1984's picture

>"But you shouldn't short a country that has more PHds working in its federal government, particularly the finance dept, than most of the world combine."

>>No, that's exactly the thing you want to short the hell out of.  It is the country that is run by people who had to run a small business that you DO NOT want to short.  An elusive entity these days unfortunately.


Bbbbzzzzz!  All wrong.


But you shouldn't short a country that has more PEOPLE working in its government, particularly the finance dept, than most of the world combined.


There.  Fixed it for you.

chindit13's picture

Don't confuse PhDs with Nobel Prize winners.  It's an easy mistake to make.  The first are merely conventional weapons, though if attacking en masse, can do a good deal of damage.  The second, though limited to a yearly production of two or three, are truly weapons of mass destruction.

LTCM had both.  They were simply too much to overcome, even for a tough guy raised on the south side of Chicago like John Meriwether.

Crisismode's picture

Having a PHd. is simply a matter of proving what a fool you were with the years at your disposal.


You WASTED them.

Not For Reuse's picture

don't have one myself, but sorry to hear you equate intensive study with wasted time. I know it must be shocking to realize that some people care more about learning than they do about making money

ManufacturedOpinion's picture

Learning WHAT ???

How to spout keynesian poopoo drivel out of your mouth ??

Seems like a COMPLETE waste of time to me.