SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Chispas who wrote (665)2/25/2004 8:10:54 PM
From: mishedlo  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 116555
 
Greenspan testimony from Steve on the FOOL

I happened to catch Greenie's testimony today. What I don't see being reported in the media today, is that Greenie said that Bush's tax cuts were the right thing to do and he repeated his position that the tax cuts should be made perminant. Rep Bobby Scott (D-VA) questioned Greenie at length that supporting tax cuts then complaining about deficits and recommending cuts in Social Security seems inconsistant. (several months ago I posted a link to Bobby Scott's presentation on Social Security, where money recovered by repealing the Bush tax cuts for the top 1% of the population would keep SS solvent for the next 75 years)

Steve



To: Chispas who wrote (665)2/25/2004 8:29:17 PM
From: mishedlo  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 116555
 
Fleck on Gold and handsets
Weak-Kneed Bulls Run from Yellow Dog

Away from stocks, the euro took a pasting (dropping 1.5% to $1.2496, with other currencies also weak) as German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said the ECB should cut rates. Gold promptly swooned on that news. I keep waiting for the day when gold says: Yup, that's exactly why folks should own me, because the dollar is a piece of confetti, and the euro is only marginally better. When that day arrives, gold will have finally reasserted itself as the only currency that is no one else's liability and cannot be printed.

The fact that gold should drop $7 because the euro was down 1.5% (as happened today) because the Chancellor of Germany is trying to get the ECB to ease is sorta nuts. But it does illustrate (1) that there is a lot of hot money in gold, which quickly responds to price action, and (2) that in some ways, the people who are long gold are still afraid of their shadow -- a not-so-uncommon occurrence in the early days of a bull market. In any case, by day's end, gold was down $8.70 to $396.10, silver was down 9 cents to $6.54, and oil was up $1.23 to $35.81 (good thing oil doesn't impact inflation).

A Cache of Inventory Is Cash in Theory

Returning to Ingram Micro, I was going to share my comments about its quarter, but as I sat down this morning to craft the spew, I received an email from a very knowledgeable reader that highlighted some of the important things to note about the call. (An additional point that I would make: Ingram Micro is also benefiting from consolidation in its industry, as well as some fairly rigorous cost-control measures.) He nailed the inventory issue, and that is what interests me the most. You will notice that he also segues to the next looming problem, which is a handset-inventory issue. Anyway, despite a bit of inside baseball, I think it's worth sharing his whole email, and here it is:

"So, back to the theoretical notion of a world without semiconductor inventory. Ingram Micro reported last night -- a surprisingly stellar quarter. They beat revenue estimates by about $1bb. However, ending inventory there grew 30% sequentially, or $450mm, in front of a down-10% sequential quarter. How does a company beat revenue estimates by $1bb and yet still grow inventory ahead of a down quarter? One would think in this situation that inventory would have ended up depleted. This is just amazing.

"Now clearly, most of IM inventory will be finished goods like PCs and flat panels, but those still all contain semiconductors, and since Ingram does do some components business, it will include raw components as well. No wonder things sound a bit mushy in PC-component land. Which brings me to the next issue: handsets. I think handset components are now experiencing the same phenomenon that PC components experienced in Q3 and Q4, which is the mad-scramble inventory build. While I think handset sales are pretty good in Q1 (normal seasonally down/potentially slightly better than normal seasonally down), they are still running at very elevated absolute levels. And, the component sales into the handset industry are running well ahead of ELEVATED handset sales (for example, LG and Samsung units in total were flat in Q4, but QCOM shipments to them were up 49% sequentially in Q4).

"So, my guess is that next quarter, we'll start hearing the same rumblings about handset components that we are hearing about PC components this Q -- slowing. And, handsets have the potential to be MUCH worse for component guys (not to mention an impossible comparison with Q3 and Q4 of 2004). The funny thing is, there's real slowing in the PC-component chain with the PC end market doing roughly fine (although there are some indications of softness now at retail, but still a bit unclear).

"Handsets have the potential to be a disaster. Given all the aggressive promotional activity and upgrading of handsets, our model still has the replacement cycle being driven down short-term from 2.5 years to 1.5 years. Clearly, this is not sustainable. It seems arithmetically that a lot of upgrade activity has been pulled forward into Q3/Q4 last year, and some Q1 this year.

"So, our model is still predictive of a slowing/brick wall hitting of handset-unit consumption in Q2 (which will stay soft for a long time as a lot of the upgrades occurred with the movement to two-year contracts, which will put a huge chunk of people out of the market for a new handset for two years!). This has the potential of happening at the same time that handset components have been building as everyone scrambling for parts. A good analogy was the Wall Street Journal article about increased steel prices on Monday. It talked about someone who was trying to hoard nails. I think this is a good analogy. Just my two steel pennies."



To: Chispas who wrote (665)2/25/2004 8:37:57 PM
From: mishedlo  Respond to of 116555
 
Here's a snip from Bobby Scott's presentation from last fall:

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I would want to point out as challenging as this chart looks, we are running up a little surplus, but we will shortly be into great deficit. And to put some of these other numbers into perspective, as we indicated, in 2001 we passed a tax cut that the top 1 percent got half of the value of that tax cut. Instead of giving the top 1 percent a tax cut, if we had directed that income flow into the Social Security Trust Fund, just what the top 1 percent got, not what everybody else got, we would have had enough money to pay Social Security benefits without reducing benefits at all for 75 years, or the top 1 percent can get a tax cut.

Page H8270-H8276 of the Congressional Record, from last Sept 16. The discussion is part of a general discussion of the deficit.

The above post from Steve



To: Chispas who wrote (665)2/25/2004 8:44:00 PM
From: mishedlo  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 116555
 
Fleck rants on Greenspan

What I learned thru observing the Chairman of the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States:

1. The desired effect of lower rates has a 6 to 9 month lag on the economy.
2. Jobs creation of 2.6 million in ’04 is “credible”.
3. Once Productivity slows, hiring will follow.
4. The reason we are not seeing the desired effect on the Trade Gap despite the weaker Dollar is owing to the short-term currency hedges that have been put on by foreign exporters.

Allow me to digress. We’ll have to go to the Video for a moment to bring back a memory or two. ‘Twas not so long ago that we harped in this space about the bubbles. Yep. Plural. All four of ‘em. That’d be the Dollar, Credit, Housing and Stocks. We won’t belabor the saga of how the stock market, for example, was busted and how, owing to the unprecedented double bubble phenomenon, has been pumped up once again even more dramatically in that the inflation of names has been broad-based and not just confined to tech. Well, that game is gettin’ kinda’ old, so we’ll just wait patiently for the day of reckoning. The Dollar bubble speaks for itself, too.

Splat. But credit and housing, oo-la-la. It had always been this writer’s contention that when they finally do “get” the credit bubble, that it’s gonna’ make the busting of the double stock market bubbles look like a box o’ chocolates, i.e., nothin’ will grow on the earth for the biblical 7 years hence. It’s gonna’ be ugly. Because if you ever were wondering what the road to perdition looks like, try to visualize it as paved with debt that has beenwalked away from, most likely because the value of the collateral has dropped below the loan against it. Got it?

Good. Okay. We are certain that Monsieur Greenspan shares this same horrific vision. Keep that in mind. Thus, the game must be kept going, lest we get a taste of the biggest fireball ever created by man. So imagine now that you have been charged with maintaining a monetary policy which will not only resuscitate the US out of a recession, but which will foster and then sustain the recovery to the point where it sustains itself, i.e., business has confidence and invests, jobs are created as these businesses grow and this in turn, sees the US consumer with a paycheck which he can then spend, keeping the economic wheels turning as planned.

But the only tool you have to accomplish this big task is the providing of liquidity, despite the fact that it was your over-the-top largesse over a period of many years, which caused the excesses in the system which fostered the bubbles to begin with. Thus, providing even more liquidity in this instance is akin to dousing a drowned man with a bucket of water. But the only alternative is to “take the hit”, i.e., let a recession run its course, allowing the excess to be worked off. But for whatever reason, you opt to prolong the fantasy, i.e., you continue to pump even more liquidity into the system and over time, you lower rates to 1958 levels. But you still can’t get a pulse, despite your promises that the positive economic effect of lower rates has but a “6 to 9 month lag.” Alas, you are not lookin’ too good. Enter the government who is as desperate as you are to jump start the economy. Aha.

They sent us to Iraq and then to the mall. Government spending jumped to a multi-decade level. The US consumer, flush with tax rebates, continued to shop. Alas, these were temporary fixes provided by Uncle Sam with a goal towards seeing the economy catch fire of its own accord. But we all know that any economic pops that are inspired thru artificial stimulus are mere Band-Aids. And even Newbies know that eventually, Band-Aids fall off. Meanwhile, in the background, they also had the brainstorm of debasing the Dollar. What was the goal? To crimp Imports and expand Exports, thereby giving the US economy some oomph in that regard. You started out small by floating a trial balloon which spoke of the possibility of disinflation to be countered by a sound policy of “reflation”, spinning this as a good thing and that a “weak Dollar” was positive for the multi-national names. Well, guess what? That backfired.

What we got was some rip-roaring higher prices in commodities. (Probably so high, that the BLS is still sittin’ on the January PPI, claiming that they can’t figure out the new categories or some such nonsense. Did you think we had forgotten about that one? Nah. Wonder what’s takin’ them so darn long? Us, too.!) Anyhow, when your smashed-Dollar policy failed to work its intended magic on US Imports and Exports, you went before Congress and made the excuse that the reason it wasn’t working right now is because of the currency hedges that have been put on by foreign exporters. And that bought you a little time because Congress didn’t have enough financial background to call you on this boner. So little, by little, you, the guy in charge of monetary policy, is seeing that nothin’, but nothin’, is working. And worst of all, your worst nightmare has come true: there is no jobs creation. So, feeling awkward about that reality, you hedged yourself by jumping back on the Productivity bandwagon.

Alas, that poor bandwagon has been from pillar to post, i.e., it was not so long ago that Productivity was our panacea, our savior, our holy grail in that it was an immutable reason as to why the FED could keep lowering rates and not trigger inflation. Lo and behold if it has not now morphed into a nuisance. Right. As long as it keeps up there, there is no need to hire anybody any time soon. And again, as the guy in charge of monetary policy, you know this. But what do you tell Congress? You tell them that as soon as Productivity declines, the Employment will start. Again, nobody jumped up out of his/her seat and questioned you on the backward nature of the cause and effect of your excuse. But these are mere mortals. So you were able to skate, once again. Whew.

But we are now down to one of the last gigs you can play, seein’ as how everything else has gone completely haywire. That’d be the refi game. That works as follows: John Q. buys a house. He runs up credit card debt along with it. Is he out of the spending game now? Well, he should be, but don’t forget, this is the New Era of Moral Hazard. Thus, he goes to the bank for a refi. He not only lowers his monthly nut, he also takes some cash out. Voila, John Q. remains in the game, made whole and consumer-worthy again, thanks to those 1958-like mortgage rates. (And unbeknownst to John Q., he has even helped to keep the monetary aggregates respectable by passing all that new do-re-mi thru his account.) But eventually, like Productivity, rates hit a wall. This does not mean that rates, again like Productivity, will move quickly in the opposite direction. It simply means that for a host of reasons, one of them pride, they will go no lower. Uh-oh.

Time has now passed. Jon Q. needs to borrow more to keep his game going. Unfortunately, he locked in a 30-yr fixed back in June of ’03 at a 5.50. And last he checked, he can do no better than that. What’s an over-burdened homeowner to do? Stop spending? Default? Heavens, no! There is always the ARM. Right. The same ARM that the Maestro touted yesterday. Why, John Q. can lower his monthly nut considerably by switching to an ARM. He could save a 100 bps or more in most instances. He can even pay down some personal debt and improve his liability-to-asset ratio (which reenergizes his borrowing power going forward, too!) Nice trade, right? So there you have it. The reason why Mr. Greenspan brought up this “trade” for the American public. It’s got an awful lot of other perqs, too. Look. He saw that the refi game is over with a capital “O”. After record stimulus for a very prolonged period, everything has turned to, er, dust. The monetary aggregates have collapsed. How sorry is that, eh? And if he doesn’t keep the last hope, the homeowner/consumer scam alive, next thing you know, housing prices will start to fall which will mark the beginning of the ultimate, fiery end for us. But if John Q. can keep doing those refis, even get involved with other, sexier “alternative mortgage products”, well, this could go on forever, right?!!! Further, if he pretends that John Q.’s “ratios” are improved, the Maestro could then announce things like the US household is not in “increased financial stress”.

That’s the “ratios” trick he is referring to. But here’s the hard facts on that: Overall, It has jumped 12% since February of ’01, when they started to cut rates. This is despite the soaring of the prices of homes. Ain’t that grand? And ain’t that somethin’ else for the Chairman of the FED to be endorsing? It’s an embarrassment, I tell you. Last, we gotta’ talk about a basic truth about ARMs by posing this question: What is the single-most pressing question the average Joe asks the broker when house shopping? Right. “What is the monthly payment?” And if they tell him he can save $110 per month by doing a flighty, 2-yr ARM instead of locking in a secure, 30-yr. fixed, well guess what? Right. Are there other reasons for an ARM? Sure, some of the more affluent can afford to press their interest-rate luck. While some others, forgetting that debt is permanent but that stock prices can actually go down and stay there, might even take advantage of an ARM and what? And play the stock market! Guess who gave them that idea, eh? And yes, there are others who expect to pay off the home in a shorter period than normal. Whatever. But you gotta’ acknowledge that the current tack is quite a switch from the traditional demand for ARMs which normally occurred when rates were exceptionally high. So you took the ARM, the quick fix, with a view that rates couldn’t go higher, only lower. I still cannot get over the Greenspan comments. Then again, what do you expect? These are the same guys who have eliminated borrowing for 30 years as rates were bottoming. Next case.



To: Chispas who wrote (665)2/25/2004 8:54:46 PM
From: mishedlo  Respond to of 116555
 
Junk
Brian Reynolds

At the start of January, we worried that we were near the beginning of a bubble, given the extraordinary ease with which companies could obtain financing in the junk market. Since the late January Fed meeting, though, we have noted that the equity markets have been in a correction, as that meeting prompted a sudden end to the incredible retail flows into the junk market as those investors adopted a less speculative attitude.

On Monday morning, we noted that the equity market correction was likely to continue, and that the reception that the next wave of junk bond issuance receives may indicate how long the correction persists. The evidence we have received since then points to the correction having a further way to go.

There is evidence that retail investors are continuing to pull back from the junk market, as evidenced by the behavior of the premiums/discounts of a number of closed-end funds that we monitor; a number of those premiums have undergone further reduction in the last few days. This has meant that a number of the most speculative companies in the junk bond universe are finding the junk market much less receptive than it was a month ago.

We've written how junk yield spreads have widened 40-50 basis points since the January Fed meeting (after tightening 750 basis points since 2002). So, that's a relatively small move, but we've written that the tone of the market has been even more important to us than spread levels, and we've had a big change in tone since the Fed meeting.

The December-January flood of retail money took spreads to much tighter levels than most institutional investors were comfortable with. So, even though we've had only a modest widening in spreads, we've written that we are still probably 50-100 basis points away from where we would see good institutional support for junk. So we're in a situation where there is not a flood of retail money to support new issuance, and where there is only modest institutional interest.

Moreover, we've written that the most speculative sectors of the junk market have seen their spreads widen more than twice as much as the overall market. These companies would have had no trouble doing a junk deal a month ago at levels 100 basis points tighter than now. Now, they are finding that they might have to pay as much as an additional 200 basis points premium to attract institutional interest. With the recent volume of deals, institutions have plenty of options, and so they see no need to take on a super speculative position unless tempted by a significant yield premium. So the market has gone from the indiscriminate funding of virtually any company to one that is much more selective. That's been a real shock to those speculative issuers.

Impact on Equity Markets

This sudden shift from a speculative junk market tone to a more discriminating one has been a contributor to the equity market correction.. The tone of the junk market is very reminiscent of the mid-June to August period of last year. We had just come off a three-month issuance surge, then volume slowed down as investors reassessed, leading to the postponement of some of the more speculative junk deals. Eventually, the junk market didn't deteriorate any further and then stabilized at levels that were good enough for a resumption of equity market gains (before the flood of retail money into junk led to the outsized equity gains of December-January).

Just as we see parallels between now and the mid-June to August period, we are seeing parallels between the present (mid-January to now) and that period in the equity market.

After a strong rise and a long period of overbought stochastics, the S&P topped out in mid-June, as was the case with the S&P in mid-January. In both cases, the longer-term stochastics then went from overbought almost (but not quite) to oversold, then the market rallied to put in what appeared to be a double-top, with the peaks about a month apart. Following the double-top, the market began to sell off again, as that technical pattern emboldened bearish investors (this brings us up to the current point in time). If the similarities between the two periods were to hold, this current selloff would accelerate over the next few weeks, with the S&P piercing support. That would further embolden the bears, but would also push the stochastics to an oversold level sometime in late March, setting the stage for a resumption of equity gains.

It is hard to forecast what a correction would look like, and even harder to draw parallels between time periods, so we do not mean to present this scenario as cast in stone. It is very plausible though, especially given the configuration of the junk market, and we think that equity investors need to at least consider it in their thinking.

It is also important to remember that, as of now, this is just a correction. Junk spreads are still narrow, and investment-grade spreads remain near at their best levels since before the Asian crisis. As long as this holds, then this should be nothing more than an equity market correction. A better tone to the junk market would imply that the correction ends sooner than last year's did. A worsening of the investment-grade market would imply a more negative outcome for equities, so the next few weeks of bond action will be important.

And of course, all of these thoughts are offered in the vein of education and not intended as advice.