3 Month FREE Trial Subscription. Monthly Research Commentary Read this months version online BEFORE you start your trial. |
Today's Tipping Points || Process of Abstraction || Commentary || Reader Roadmap || Subscriptions || Gordon T Long TIPPING POINTS |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
FREE COPY... Current Thesis Advisory: CONTACT US
|
|
ARCHIVES
Reading the right books? We have analyzed & included
Book Review- Five Thumbs Up for Steve Greenhut's Plunder!
|
TIPPING POINTS
"The moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point"
The tipping point is the critical point in an evolving situation that leads to a new and irreversible development. The term is said to have originated in the field of epidemiology when an infectious disease reaches a point beyond any local ability to control it from spreading more widely. A tipping point is often considered to be a turning point. The term is now used in many fields. Journalists apply it to social phenomena, demographic data, and almost any change that is likely to lead to additional consequences. Marketers see it as a threshold that, once reached, will result in additional sales. In some usage, a tipping point is simply an addition or increment that in itself might not seem extraordinary but that unexpectedly is just the amount of additional change that will lead to a big effect. In the butterfly effect of chaos theory , for example, the small flap of the butterfly's wings that in time leads to unexpected and unpredictable results could be considered a tipping point. However, more often, the effects of reaching a tipping point are more immediately evident. A tipping point may simply occur because a critical mass has been reached.
The Tipping Point: How Little Things Can Make a Big Difference is a book by Malcolm Gladwell, first published by Little Brown in 2000. Gladwell defines a tipping point as "the moment of critical mass, the threshold, the boiling point." The book seeks to explain and describe the "mysterious" sociological changes that mark everyday life. As Gladwell states, "Ideas and products and messages and behaviors spread like viruses do."
Gladwell describes the "three rules of epidemics" (or the three "agents of change") in the tipping points of epidemics.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
PROCESS OF ABSTRACTION
SOVEREIGN DEBT & CREDIT CRISIS
MUNI BOND OUTFLOWS
RISK REVERSAL
RESIDENTIAL REAL ESTATE - PHASE II
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE
2011 will see the largest magnitude of US bank commercial real estate mortgage maturities on record.
2012 should be a top tick record setter for bank CRE maturities looking both backward and forward over the half decade ahead at least.
Will this be an issue for an industry that has been supporting reported earnings growth in part by reduced loan loss reserves over the recent past? In 2010, approximately $250 billion in commercial real estate mortgage maturities occurred. In the next three years we have four times that much paper coming due.
Will CRE woes, (published or unpublished) further restrain private sector credit creation ahead via the commercial banking conduit?
Wiil the regulators force the large banks to show any increase in loan impairment. Again, given the incredible political clout of the financial sector, I doubt it.
We have experienced one of the most robust corporate profit recoveries on record over the last half century. We know reported financial sector earnings are questionable at best, but the regulators will do absolutely nothing to change that.
So once again we find ourselves in a period of Fed sponsored asset appreciation. The thought, of course, being that if stock prices levitate so will consumer confidence. Which, according to Mr. Bernanke will lead to increased spending and a virtuous circle of economic growth. Oh really? The final chart below tells us consumer confidence is not driven by higher stock prices, but by job growth.
9 - CHRONIC UNEMPLOYMENT
There are 3 major inflationary drivers underway.
1- Negative Real Interest Rates Worldwide - with policy makers' reluctant to let their currencies appreciate to market levels. If no-one can devalue against competing currencies then they must devalue against something else. That something is goods, services and assets.
2- Structural Shift by China- to a) Hike Real Wages, b) Slowly appreciate the Currency and c) Increase Interest Rates.
3- Ongoing Corporate Restructuring and Consolidation - placing pricing power increasingly back in the hands of companies as opposed to the consumer.
FOOD PRICE PRESSURES
RICE: Abdolreza Abbassian, at the FAO in Rome, says the price of rice, one of the two most critical staples for global food security, remains below the peaks of 2007-08, providing breathing space for 3bn people in poor countries. Rice prices hit $1,050 a tonne in May 2008, but now trade at about $550 a tonne.
WHEAT: The cost of wheat, the other staple critical for global food security, is rising, but has not yet surpassed the highs of 2007-08. US wheat prices peaked at about $450 a tonne in early 2008. They are now trading just under $300 a tonne.
The surge in the FAO food index is principally on the back of rising costs for corn, sugar, vegetable oil and meat, which are less important than rice and wheat for food-insecure countries such as Ethiopia, Bangladesh and Haiti. At the same time, local prices in poor countries have been subdued by good harvests in Africa and Asia.
- In India, January food prices reflected a year-on-year increase of 18%t.
- Buyers must now pay 80%t more in global markets for wheat, a key commodity in the world's food supply, than they did last summer. The poor are especially hard-hit. "We will be dealing with the issue of food inflation for quite a while," analysts with Frankfurt investment firm Lupus Alpha predict.
- Within a year, the price of sugar on the world market has gone up by 25%.
US STOCK MARKET VALUATIONS
WORLD ECONOMIC FORUM
Potential credit demand to meet forecast economic growth to 2020
The study forecast the global stock of loans outstanding from 2010 to 2020, assuming a consensus projection of global
economic growth at 6.3% (nominal) per annum. Three scenarios of credit growth for 2009-2020 were modelled:
• Global leverage decrease. Global credit stock would grow at 5.5% per annum, reaching US$ 196 trillion in 2020. To
meet consensus economic growth under this scenario, equity would need to grow almost twice as fast as GDP.
• Global leverage increase. Global credit stock would grow at 6.6% per annum, reaching US$ 220 trillion in 2020.
Likely deleveraging in currently overheated segments militates against this scenario.
• Flat global leverage. Global credit stock would grow at 6.3% per annum to 2020, tracking GDP growth and reaching
US$ 213 trillion in 2020 – almost double the total in 2009. This scenario, which assumes that modest
deleveraging in developed markets will be offset by credit growth in developing markets, provides the primary credit
growth forecast used in this report.
Will credit growth be sufficient to meet demand?
Rapid growth of both capital markets and bank lending will be required to meet the increased demand for credit – and it is
not assured that either has the required capacity. There are four main challenges.
Low levels of financial development in countries with rapid credit demand growth. Future coldspots may result from the
fact that the highest expected credit demand growth is among countries with relatively low levels of financial access. In
many of these countries, a high proportion of the population is unbanked, and capital markets are relatively undeveloped.
Challenges in meeting new demand for bank lending. By 2020, some US$ 28 trillion of new bank lending will be
required in Asia, excluding Japan (a 265% increase from 2009 lending volumes) – nearly US$ 19 trillion of it in China
alone. The 27 EU countries will require US$ 13 trillion in new bank lending over this period, and the US close to US$
10 trillion. Increased bank lending will grow banks’ balance sheets, and regulators are likely to impose additional capital
requirements on both new and existing assets, creating an additional global capital requirement of around US$ 9 trillion
(Exhibit vi). While large parts of this additional requirement can be satisfied by retained earnings, a significant capital gap in
the system will remain, particularly in Europe.
The need to revitalize securitization markets. Without a revitalization of securitization markets in key markets, it is doubtful
that forecast credit growth is realizable. There is potential for securitization to recover: market participants surveyed by
McKinsey in 2009 expected the securitization market to return to around 50% of its pre-crisis volume within three years.
But to rebuild investor confidence, there will need to be increased price transparency, better data on collateral pools, and
better quality ratings.
The importance of cross-border financing. Asian savers will continue to fund Western consumers and governments:
China and Japan will have large net funding surpluses in 2020 (of US$ 8.5 trillion and US$ 5.7 trillion respectively), while
the US and other Western countries will have significant funding gaps. The implication is that financial systems must
remain global for economies to obtain the required refinancing; “financial protectionism” would lock up liquidity and stifle
growth.
US$ RESERVE CURRENCY
Société Générale fears China has lost control over its red-hot economy and risks lurching from boom to bust over the next year, with major ramifications for the rest of the world.
Société Générale said China's overheating may reach 'peak frenzy' in mid-2011
- The French bank has told clients to hedge against the danger of a blow-off spike in Chinese growth over coming months that will push commodity prices much higher, followed by a sudden reversal as China slams on the brakes. In a report entitled The Dragon which played with Fire, the bank's global team said China had carried out its own version of "quantitative easing", cranking up credit by 20 trillion (£1.9 trillion) or 50pc of GDP over the past two years.
- It has waited too long to drain excess stimulus. "Policy makers are already behind the curve. According to our Taylor Rule analysis, the tightening needed is about 250 basis points," said the report, by Alain Bokobza, Glenn Maguire and Wei Yao.
- The Politiburo may be tempted to put off hard decisions until the leadership transition in 2012 is safe. "The skew of risks is very much for an extended period of overheating, and therefore uncontained inflation," it said. Under the bank's "risk scenario" - a 30pc probability - inflation will hit 10pc by the summer. "This would cause tremendous pain and fuel widespread social discontent," and risks a "pernicious wage-price spiral".
- The bank said overheating may reach "peak frenzy" in mid-2011. Markets will then start to anticipate a hard-landing, which would see non-perfoming loans rise to 20pc (as in early 1990s) and a fall in bank shares of 50pc to 75pc over the following 12 months. "We think growth could slow to 5pc by early 2012, which would be a drama for China. It would be the first hard-landing since 1994 and would destabilise the global economy. It is not our central scenario, but if it happens: commodities won't like it; Asian equities won't like it; and emerging markets won't like it," said Mr Bokobza, head of global asset allocation. However, it may bring down bond yields and lead to better growth in Europe and the US, a mirror image of the recent outperformance by the BRICs (Brazil, Russia, India and China).
- Diana Choyleva from Lombard Street Research said the drop in headline inflation from 5.1pc to 4.6pc in December is meaningless because the regime has resorted to price controls on energy, water, food and other essentials. The regulators pick off those goods rising fastest. The index itself is rejigged, without disclosure. She said inflation is running at 7.6pc on a six-month annualised basis, and the sheer force of money creation will push it higher. "Until China engineers a more substantial tightening, core inflation is set to accelerate.
- The longer growth stays above trend, the worse the necessary downswing. China's violent cycle could be highly destabilising for the world." Charles Dumas, Lombard's global strategist, said the Chinese and emerging market boom may end the same way as the bubble in the 1990s. "The basic strategy of the go-go funds is wrong: they risk losing half their money like last time."
- Société Générale said runaway inflation in China will push gold higher yet, but "take profits before year end".
- The picture is more nuanced for food and industrial commodities. China accounts for 35pc of global use of base metals, 21pc of grains, and 10pc of crude oil. Prices will keep climbing under a soft-landing, a 70pc probability. A hard-landing will set off a "substantial reversal". Copper is "particularly exposed", and might slump from $9,600 a tonne to its average production cost near $4,000. Chinese real estate and energy equities will prosper under a soft-landing,
- The bank likes regional exposure through the Tokyo bourse, which is undervalued but poised to recover as Japan comes out of its deflation trap. If you fear a hard landing, avoid the whole gamut of Chinese equities. It will be clear enough by June which of these two outcomes is baked in the pie.
PUBLIC SENTIMENT & CONFIDENCE
SHRINKING REVENUE GROWTH RATES
PIMCO'S NEW NORMAL: According to PIMCO, the coiners of the term, the new normal is also explained as an environment wherein “the snapshot for ‘consensus expectations’ has shifted: from traditional bell-shaped curves – with a high likelihood mean and thin tails (indicating most economists have similar expectations) – to a much flatter distribution of outcomes with fatter tails (where opinion is divided and expectations vary considerably).” That is to say, the distribution of forecasts has become more uniform (as per Exhibit 1).
Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke gave his predictions on a House Republican plan to cut $60 billion dollars from the FY 2011 budget, saying it would eliminate 200, 000 jobs and only slightly lower economic growth.
He instead endorsed a Congressional federal deficit reduction plan that would take effect over a five to 10 year period, saying that markets look more towards Congressional action than the actual state of the economy. His remarks came during a House Financial Services Committee hearing in which he delivered his agency's semi-annual monetary report.
Despite Bernanke’s observations, several Republican lawmakers expressed doubt based on past efforts by the Fed and Congress to prompt economic growth through large stimulus packages.
Yesterday, the Fed Chair told the Senate Banking Committee that the U.S. economy will continue to grow this year despite rising oil prices, a high employment rate and weak housing market.
The 1978 Humphrey-Hawkins Act requires the Federal Reserve Board of Governors to deliver a report to Congress twice a year on its past economic policy decisions and discuss recent financial and economic developments.
Although the U.S. dollar is considered a safe haven currency, current geopolitical concerns are unlikely to lead to significant dollar strength.
The U.S. dollar is a counter-cyclical currency and it is also considered to be a safe haven currency. Indeed, the dollar has benefited during periods of “risk off” over the last two years. But most of those episodes were simply driven by growth concerns - investors sold their high beta positions in global equities and commodities (including crude oil) and bought U.S. Treasuries and the dollar. Risk aversion driven by Middle East turmoil and higher oil prices may not be so supportive for the U.S. dollar: First, regime changes in the Arab world are not necessarily favorable to the U.S.’s economic and political agenda. Second, the U.S. is the world’s largest net oil importer and consumer. Higher oil prices will be relatively more harmful to the U.S. economy. Third, potential policy responses to rising oil prices will be dollar bearish. Higher oil prices would be considered by policymakers to be a negative growth shock rather than an inflationary impulse. Bottom line: Strife in the Middle East is unlikely to benefit the dollar.
The budget of the U.S. government as presented by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) is a counterfeit budget, inauthentic and riddled with blatantly false projections. As late as 2009, in the midst of the Great Recession, the OMB was projecting surpluses in the Federal budget by 2012.
By 2009, the OMB had plenty of data on the recession and the opportunity to revise their previous estimates to more realistic levels.
But instead, the OMB continued issuing pie-in-the-sky estimates which grossly underestimated future deficits:
2009 estimate: receipts: $2.7 trillion outlays: $3.1 trillion deficit: $–407 billion
2010 estimate: receipts: $2.93 trillion outlays: $3.09 trillion deficit: $–159.9 billion
2011 estimate: receipts: $ 3.07 trillion outlays: $3.17 trillion deficit: $–94 billion
2012 estimate: receipts: $ 3.26 trillion outlays: $3.22 trillion deficit: $+48 billion
The reality is that the 2012 deficit is expected to hit $1.6 trillion, a sum that equals 11% of the nation's gross domestic product (GDP).
In other words, the OMB and the rest of the Federal machinery issues simulacra of authentic budgets--counterfeits designed to fool the people and win their trust via artifice and facsimiles of authenticity.
As Bernie Madoff recently observed--and we can suppose he is an expert in manufacturing facsimiles, fraud, embezzlement and counterfeiting authenticity out of lies--the U.S. is a giant Ponzi scheme.
The financial "reforms" are counterfeit reforms.
The "balancing the budget cuts" are counterfeit.
The projections of future growth are counterfeit.
The unemployment numbers are counterfeit.
The inflations statistics are counterfeit.
And of course, the "news" which drives the stock market ever higher is also counterfeit.
When everything is counterfeit, then what's left that's authentic and trustworthy? Essentially nothing.
A touch over 22% of US Federal debt matures in one year (2011). A touch less than 50% of total Federal debt matures within three years. And as you eyeball the debt maturities of 2011 through 2013, we believe it's fair to say that the average maturity of just shy of half of “official” US total Federal debt is roughly a year and one half.
Trying to be conservative, with one year Treasury paper near 30 basis points in cost and three year paper near 100 bp, we believe it's fair to say that a bit less than one half of total publicly traded (excluding intergovernmental transfers) Federal debt has an average cost of capital of about 55 basis points, again remembering that in weighting these numbers the bulk of maturities occurs w/in 1 year. And without question this is a gift of Fed interest rate engineering at the theoretical zero bound. The cost of servicing US Federal debt interest payments has been hooked up to a Fed sponsored ventilator, if you will, as it's certainly not breathing on its own.
At year end 2006, “official” US Federal debt outstanding stood at $4.9 trillion. The latest Fed Flow of Funds numbers tell us that by the third quarter of 2010, that number is now just over $9 trillion, an increase of $4.1 trillion. Not quite a doubling in US Federal debt. To find a similar increase of $4.1 trillion prior to the beginning of 2007, one has to travel back a quarter century and combine ALL Federal debt taken on. We’ve now accomplished in three and three quarter years what took a quarter century to accomplish.
And of course what has happened to 1 year Treasury rates since the dawn of 2007? They have fallen from literally 4.94% to under 0.3%. You get the picture.
The government has been able to take on this magnitude of new debt as debt service costs are negligible under 30 basis points. This is the birth place of the fiscal trap.
BOXED IN
The set of facts and circumstances we've dragged you through so far in this discussion argue incredibly strongly that the US is not going to be able to "inflate its way out" of its current leverage/entitlement obligation position. Of course this thematic comment rests squarely upon the assumption that US interest rates would rise in an accelerating inflationary environment. And yet wildly enough, does it not appear that Fed monetary actions seem absolutely hell bent on reflation at all costs? It sure seems that way.