Showing posts with label manny pacquiao. Show all posts
Showing posts with label manny pacquiao. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 26, 2013

Indonesia Crisis Watch: Rupiah Falls to New Lows, JCI drops 2.3%

The 11,730 USD-rupiah resistance level didn’t hold for long.

image
image

Today the US dollar-rupiah closed to a fresh 5 year high at 11,765 after hitting 11,798 intraday.
image

The yield of the Indonesia’s sovereign 10 year bonds was marginally up (one basis point) though.

But activities in the domestic bond market barely explained of the weakness of the rupiah.

Early today, Indonesia’s government reportedly failed to raise a targeted $450 million in dollar bond sales. The government settled with only $190 million. This comes even when coupon yields had been priced higher or “at a weighted average yield of 3.51671%, about half a percentage point higher than a bond with a similar maturity that Indonesia had earlier sold overseas” according to the Wall Street Journal

This meant that the markets expected much higher yields than what the Indonesian government had been willing to offer. So the failed expectations by Indonesia's bond market may have been vented on the rupiah (via outflows).

image
image

Meanwhile the weak rupiah seems to have been transmitted to Indonesia’s stocks where the benchmark JCI got bludgeoned by 2.3%. And as shown above, the gist of the losses by the JCI occurred at the session’s close.

image

ASEAN stocks has been largely mixed today amidst the rupiah's weakness.

The Phisix ended its 6 day losing streak with a last minute rally. 

image

After spending most of the day on the red, the Phisix closed .35% higher. Curiously, opposite to the JCI, gains in the Phisix had been due to a last minute spike (technistock.net)

image

Given the lopsided advance (51) decline (111) spread (-60) and the mixed sectoral performance (PSE), today’s rebound appears to have been ‘centered’ on a few heavyweights. This may have been due to entities desperate to see a higher Phisix. 

image

Incidentally the Philippine bellwether closed 1.32% Monday a day after Manny Pacquiao’s victory.

A win by the legendary Pacquiao supposedly would have lifted the market’s sentiments. Yet despite the statistical data used to “prove” such postulations where Pacquiao’s triumph should have meant higher stocks since stocks rose by 73% of the time (frequency) backed by .5% gains (scale), apparently Pacquiao’s win became a black swan or an outlier event.

This validates my view of the tendency by so-called experts to use the current events--via the availability heuristic, resorting to pattern seeking methods and appealing to emotions--to justify personal biases and to satisfy public demand for simplistic explanations.

Yet such events turn about to be largely irrelevant or diversionary noises.

Saturday, November 23, 2013

Phisix and the Manny Pacquiao Post Hoc

The boxing legend Manny Pacquiao 35 will try to regain lost glory with a return bout against Brandon Rios 27 for the vacant WBO welterweight bout at Macau SAR.

image

The Bloomberg presents an interesting “chart of the day” on how the Phisix reacts to Mr. Pacquiao’s historical fight performances
The CHART OF THE DAY shows the Philippine Stock Exchange Index has risen 73 percent of the time in the first trading day after a Pacquiao win, compared with 52 percent for all days since 2007. The gauge climbed an average 0.5 percent the day after fights, versus an average 0.04 percent increase for the entire period.

“Pacquiao’s victory in the ring creates a nationwide euphoria that things will get better -- positive sentiment, positive investment,” said Jonathan Ravelas, chief market strategist at BDO Unibank. “A victory by Pacquiao will help lift the Philippine spirit at a time when it’s facing the impact of calamities. The nation definitely needs to hear something positive right now.”
In my view this represents a great example of the cognitive bias called clustering illusion—or looking for patterns where there have been none, which also serves as a convenient “post hoc” rationalization for the relationship between Mr. Pacquiao fights and the Phisix.

Some facts...

image

Mr. Pacquiao unfortunately lost his two last bouts in 2012 (Tim Bradley June 9, 2012 and to Juan Miguel Marquez December 8, 2012—Box Rec

image

And a coincidence is that Mr. Pacquiao’s surprise loss to Marquez in 2012 coincided with the Typhoon Pablo December 2-9 2012, which turned out to be the “most destructive” storm for the Philippines-which Typhoon Yolanda has been widely expected to top.

The final tally from Typhoon Yolanda has yet to be reported. For now agricultural losses (php 10.59 billion) and infrastructure damage (php 1.98 billion) which adds up to php 12.57. The government estimates production losses at Php 8.6 billion. So total losses is at Php 21.7 billion halfway from Typhoon Pablo. (inquirer)

While it may be true a day after Pacquiao’s victories resulted to mostly gains in the Phisix in terms of frequency (73%) and scale (.5%), Mr. Pacquiao’s alleged contribution in “uplifting the Philippine spirit” has not been supported by trends seen from the longer frame. [Note I did not bother to take a look at the Phisix returns post Bradley and Marquez fights]

Proof?

image

The Phisix roared to its highest level in May 2013 despite the twin losses by Mr. Pacquiao to Mssrs Bradley and Marquez. Again the loss to Marquez has been coincidental with Typhoon Pablo. 

In short, there has hardly been a relationship between Mr. Pacquiao’s performance (or Typhoon Pablo) and the Phisix which media and the experts try to associate and sensationalize by appealing to emotions.

The above also shows how desperate industry participants have become since the losses from June (which have been Non-typhoon or Pacquaio related but about the renascence of the global bond vigilantes) 

The Phisix has posted losses for three consecutive weeks, namely 3.5% week ending November 8, .14% November 15, and this week’s 4.12%, for a total of 7.76%. 

My hunch: unless Monday should turn out with a surprise deterioration from our neighbors, Indonesia and Thailand (which I believe have signified as the key sources for the weakness in the Phisix), the oversold conditions of the Phisix should translate to a temporary bounce, whether Pacquiao wins or losses.

As for Pacquiao’s boxing career, whether he wins or he losses, I believe that he has reached his peak, and is on the way to a decline for the simple reason that Mr. Pacquiao is human and mortal

Mr. Pacquiao’s insistence to refrain from retirement is I think not only about money and prestige but about the denial of this reality. The same denial we see in industry participants facing what seems as increasing risks of a full scale bear market for ASEAN. 

As a former boxing aficionado, while I respect Mr. Pacquiao as one of the greatest boxers ever, that respect remains limited to the four corners of the boxing ring.

Tuesday, February 12, 2013

Curse of the Laffer Curve: Why Manny Pacquiao Prefers His Next Fight Outside the US

Boxing legend Manny Pacquiao seems to have joined the list of celebrities in implicitly denouncing class warfare policies by voting with their feet. 

More signs of the curse of the Laffer curve (elasticity of taxable income) in motion.

From Yahoo.com
Manny Pacquiao's chief adviser insisted Monday that the Filipino superstar's preference is for his next bout – a fifth fight against Juan Manuel Marquez – to take place away from Las Vegas, with the off-shore Chinese gambling resort of Macau emerging as the "favorite."

Michael Koncz told Yahoo! Sports that the 39.6 percent tax rate Pacquiao would face if he were to fight again in the U.S. makes a fall bout in Las Vegas "a no go."

Promoter Bob Arum is hopeful of arranging a fifth match between Pacquiao and Marquez in the fall, potentially on Sept. 14. Arum's preference is for the fight to be at the MGM Grand in Las Vegas, which is his company's home base.

But Arum and Koncz say Pacquiao is balking at the additional money he'd lose to the government if the fight were held in Las Vegas. Arum said Pacquiao would not have to pay taxes if the fight takes place in casinos in either Singapore or Macau.

"Manny can go back to Las Vegas and make $25 million, but how much of it will he end up with – $15 million?" Arum said. "If he goes to Macau, perhaps his purse will only be $20 million, but he will get to keep it all, so he will be better off."
Mr. Pacquiao appears to have learned his lessons from his domestic experience.  

Philippine tax authorities has continually been pressuring, if not harassing, by filing criminal charges against him for "failing to present his tax records"in 2012. 

The persecution of Mr. Pacquiao may have been politically motivated. This can be traced to his previous endorsement of the opposition in the 2010 presidential elections, as well as having joined the opposition political party of led by vice president Jejomar Binay (PDP Laban) in 2012.  Mr. Pacquiao has also been known ally of the ex-President GMA.

Nonetheless international celebrities opting to vote with their feet, which serves as an implicit tax protest, signifies as more bad news for the welfare-warfare state.

Wednesday, December 12, 2012

Manny Pacquiao Didn’t Let Fans Down, Prodded by Media Fans Deluded Themselves

I empathize with boxing legend Manny Pacquiao for undeservingly feeling “guilty” over public pressures, following his stunning KO loss which he suffered from older Juan Manuel Marquez, a few days.

From MSN News
"The low morale, the sadness, I accept that. This is my job.... But the reaction of the Filipinos, the many who cried, especially my family, it really hurts me," he said in an interview on the GMA network.

The former eight-division world champion wiped tears from his eyes listening to his wife, Jinkee, make a tearful appeal on camera for her husband, who turns 34 next week, to hang up his gloves. 
Pacquio shouldn’t be so hard on himself. He lost because he is just human

A random one-punch shot, in a round which he so-dominated, at the last two seconds virtually changed the outcome to his opponents favor.

Nassim Taleb would have called this Pacquiao’s black swan.

Failure to adhere to reality has made Pacquiao’s loss unwarrantedly controversial. This is hardly about the lack of conditioned training, the charge on Marquez’s alleged use of steroids, and other rubbish attributions. Religion has even been absurdly imputed on this. Others have used this as pretext to try to impose political correctness on the contrasting opinion of the others.

He lost because he lost. He was at wrong place at the wrong time. Period. The rest of supposed 'expert' rationalization represents post hoc fallacy.

It has been my impression that the media has made the public believe that sheer nationalism or the force of nationalism by itself would lead to Pacquiao’s sustained invincibility, immortality and everlasting string of victories. 

Pacquiao’s decisive loss exposed such hogwash. In the same way, belief in extreme nationalism has been demolished after 60-78 MILLION lives had needlessly been lost due to World War II.

Pacquiao didn’t let his fans down. The fans have no one else to blame but themselves, for unduly placing extremely high expectations in his supposed ‘superhuman’ capabilities, and importantly, for falling prey into mainstream media’s hype. 

This is a great example of bubble psychology. The same lessons which will permeate and eventually apply to the Philippine capital markets.

As British essayist, critic, poet, and novelist Gilbert Keith Chesterton once sarcastically remarked
"Journalism is popular, but it is popular mainly as fiction. Life is one world, and life seen in the newspapers is another."
Reality simply dealt false dogmatism a rude and painful awakening.

Monday, December 10, 2012

Juan Marquez Shows Manny Pacquiao is Only Human

I expected younger opponents to deliver the closing chapters of Manny Pacquaio’s glorious and unparalleled boxing career, and hardly 39 year old Mexican Juan Miguel Marquez.

Whatever reasons attributed; deficient physical conditioning, reduced practice, lack of concentration, politics and et. al. that bout showed how luck can play a big and decisive role in determining outcomes.

I haven’t been watching boxing matches but the alternating knockdowns from both pugilists which I read via ESPN’s live forum, prompted me to do so from the replay. And I’d reckon that Marquez-Pacquiao 4 was a classic bout at par with Thrilla in Manila, Ali-Foreman, Sugar Ray Leonard-Roberto Duran etc...

And as I have been saying, Manny Pacquiao heralded as national pride, is only human. That match, contra populist sentiment, delivered the poignant message.

While boxing legend Pacquiao says he will consider retirement only after losing the second time, I’d say that the law of diminishing returns has been getting the better of him. The reason Pacquiao’s denies or refuses to accept retirement is that as I previously wrote
Of course reality bites, Mr. Pacquiao’s fame, fortune and political career have all been tied up with his boxing career. Once Mr. Pacquiao retires this privilege will erode overtime, as with all of the local celebrity sporting forebears.

So he may push his boxing career to the limits or take unnecessary risks in order to struggle to preserve this privilege.
Pacquiao’s attachment to his present privileges reflects on the people’s natural affinity to entitlements.

Yet Pacquiao’s devastating loss has stirred an outpouring of mushy comments on mainstream and social media. Most seem to forget that his national stature has come about due to his string of victories. That era may have ended. 

Where victory has a thousand fathers, said the late US President John F. Kennedy, defeat is an orphan. Such truism will likely expose on the public’s penchant for survivorship bias or the attachment or fixation on winners. If Pacquiao  continues to lose (and lose badly) will he remain the national pride? I doubt. My intuition is that like the other predecessor sporting legends, he will be forgotten. And this will likely even be manifested in his political career. The public will look for other talking points.

But not for me, as a former boxing fan, I’d say Pacquiao’s most valuable legacy have been one for the sporting history books: a feat that will remain unrivaled for a long long long period of time. 

Monday, June 18, 2012

Surprise, Manny Pacquiao is Human

Veteran sport analyst and commentator Ronnie Nathanielsz finally awakens to reality and asked the right question “Is Pacquiao Slowing Down”

Mr. Nathanielsz at yahoo.com

As we cautioned some years ago, the late nights, the drinking and gambling would eventually take its toll on Pacquiao's physical condition and when the effects of abuse of a person's body and the effects of dissipation set in, it often happens abruptly.

A careful review of the fight tape shows Pacquiao has lost a split second in terms of speed, which both Arum and trainer Freddie Roach long pointed to as a key factor in Pacquiao's arsenal which effectively accentuated his power.

"Speed kills" was what Arum pointed to before Pacquiao pulverized De La Hoya that saw him quit on his stool at the end of the seventh round.

That speed has diminished as Pacquiao nears his 34th birthday on December 17, and as we assess his diminishing assets of speed and devastating power we need to accept the reality that the passing of the summers inevitably takes its toll on even the finest, relentlessly hardworking athlete who walked through the doors of Roach's Wild Card Gym in Los Angeles in the first week of June 2001, eleven long years ago. The innumerable fights, the punches he has taken, the burdens of training and the demands on his time as a congressman, a crossover superstar, a TV personality and a caring human being not to mention his former wild and wooly ways have surely taken their toll and its time we admit it, although such an admission doesn't mitigate the high crime committed in Las Vegas last June 9.

Let us put in a simple way: Contrary to popular expectations, Manny Pacquiao is just human. Yes read my lips, human. Mortal. Not superman. Yes, he susceptible to physiological ageing as anyone else.

Even if Mr. Pacquiao did away with gambling, drinking or late night escapades during his early years, unless technology will save the day, age will function as Manny’s neutralizing factor. This exempts no one, not even priests, monks or other vice free celibates.

You can go to the Boxing Hall of Fame and examine one by one and determine the median, if not the average age, when these former boxing legends had their career inflection point or when they retired.

That’s where the legendary Manny Pacquiao is today.

In the past, most of Pacquiao’s scintillating or brilliant victories came at the expense of OLDER boxers as noted I here. That cycle has turned.

Mr. Pacquiao will now wear the shoes of his former older opponents as most of his contemporaries have hanged up their gloves. So he will be faced with YOUNGER boxers even if he wins against Tim Bradley in a return bout.

The point is the more Pacquiao fights, the lesser the chances of his victory. Of course, this comes in the condition that he duels with younger foes with world class caliber.

And if he insist on staying on the ring, we should expect that after 3-4 more bouts (assuming 2 fights a year), the chances of losing badly (by KO or TKO) will become very significant. And that's when reality will sink in to him (that's if he remains stubborn to pursue more ring engagements)

So while relative age matter, a boxer’s career cycle has even more impact.

In economics, this is merely called the law of diminishing returns.

The law of diminishing returns based on the physiological ageing process has brought upon the twilight of Mr. Pacquiao’s boxing career.

Truth hurts. But that’s how nature works.

Deal with it.

Monday, June 11, 2012

Expect a Continuation of the Risk ON-Risk OFF Environment

Today’s controversial split decision loss by World champion and Filipino boxing legend Manny Pacquiao serves as a vivid example of the self-imposed limits of nature on people.

As I pointed out on my blog[1], about 2 hours prior to the Pacquiao-Bradley match, Pacquiao has almost reached the natural speed limits of boxers, where the law of diminishing returns from ageing will turn the tide against him. Pacquiao’s contemporaries, the greatest boxers of the pasts, essentially sought retirement by mid-30s. Mr. Pacquiao is 33 and turns 34 this December.

And contrary to popular expectations, today’s match reveals that the venerable (in sports, not in politics) Filipino champion Manny Pacquiao is just like everyone else, a mortal. A victory from a rematch will not take away the laws of nature. The Pacquiao-Bradley fight heralds the twilight of the Pacquiao boxing era.

Pacquiao’s experience applies to the markets, the inflationism is a policy that will not and cannot last.

For the past few weeks, I have been emphasizing on this[2].

Like it or not, UNLESS there will be monumental moves from central bankers of major economies in the coming days, the global financial markets including the local Phisix will LIKELY endure more period of intense volatility on both directions but with a downside bias.

I am NOT saying that we are on an inflection phase in transit towards a bear market. Evidences have yet to establish such conditions, although I am NOT DISCOUNTING such eventuality given the current flow of developments.

What I am simply saying is that for as long as UNCERTAINTIES OVER MONETARY POLICIES AND POLITICAL ENVIRONMENTS PREVAIL, global equity markets will be sensitive to dramatic volatilities from an increasingly short term “RISK ON-RISK OFF” environment.

And where the RISK ON environment has been structurally reliant on central banking STEROIDS, ambiguities in political and monetary policy directions tilts the balance towards a RISK OFF environment.

Proven True: Sharp Volatility on Both Directions With A Downside Bias

This week, local markets confirmed my assessments.

Today’s dramatic volatilities have been representative of the gross distortion of the financial markets from sustained interventionism in various forms.

Unlike Pacquiao’s predicament, while it may be so that peak inflationism has yet to be reached, I believe that we are nearly there. All it would probably take is a global recession which will likely be met by the fully loaded firepower of central bankers.

Because the Phisix missed the selloff during the previous week as global markets got clobbered which I suspect has been due to some interventions by non-market forces, Monday’s 3.4% quasi-crash seems like a belated ventilation of the downside volatility that I have been concerned with.

clip_image001

Yet bulls remain in the hopeful that stock markets will continue to climb, I am not sure. Again, evidences don’t seem to confirm this and that the conditions I have stated above has yet to be met.

Also the current actions in the Phisix serve as a wonderful example of the tradeoffs between magnitude and frequency, where the frequency of accrued small gains can easily be wiped out by rare short bout/s of huge moves.

One of my favorite radical thinkers Nassim Nicolas Taleb called this the Turkey problem.

I explained in February of 2011[3]

clip_image002

The Turkey is fed from day 1 and so forth, and as a consequence gains weight through the feeding process.

From the Turkey’s point of view such largesse will persist.

However, to the surprise of the Turkey on the 1,001th day or during Thanksgiving Day, the days of glory end: the Turkey ends up on the dinner table. The turkey met the black swan.

The turkey problem is a construct of the folly of reading past performance into the future, and likewise the problem of frequency versus the magnitude, both of which serves as the cornerstone for Black Swan events.

In short, to avoid being the turkey means to understand the risk conditions that could lead to a cataclysmic black swan event (low probability, high impact event).

And this is why it has been IMPERATIVE to establish the underlying risk conditions affecting the marketplace rather than simply guessing on where short term fluctuations are headed for.

Given the current conditions, I wouldn’t want to be the turkey that ends up on the dinner table.

I would rather identify a trend that can provide me the opportunities for measured price moves in the face of established risk conditions given a time window to work on. Luck, to paraphrase the distinguished French chemist and microbiologist Louis Pasteur[4], favors the prepared.

In other words, determining the whereabouts of the stages of the boom bust cycle should be more of the priority than just the price levels.

clip_image004

Volatility has been ubiquitous and not limited to the Phisix. The US S&P 500 has been experiencing the same degree of turbulence.

Under current environment it would be very risky to interpret sporadic moves as sustainable trends.

clip_image006

Even gold has not been spared from drastic pendulum swings.

While I am still exceedingly bullish gold over the long run, I think there will equally be strong vacillations on both directions. Perhaps gold will undergo a consolidation phase first. But a severe downside move cannot be discounted.

Yet going back to the Phisix, the major Philippine bellwether was down only by 1.35% over the week which means 60% of Monday’s losses had been recovered.

clip_image008

At the world markets, this week’s performance has been in sharp contrast with that of the previous.

Monday’s quasi-crash by the Phisix has partially been offset by intra-week succession of gains whose rebound comes in the light of a global rally founded on multiple reports of rescues.

The markets cheered when ECB’s president Mario Draghi declared that “We monitor all developments closely and we stand ready to act”[5]. Also proposals for a grand rescue mechanism via a regional banking union had been floated[6] to the delight of steroid addicted markets.

Meanwhile, the US Federal Reserve chair Ben Bernanke employed the same I will backup the markets spiel with “As always, the Federal Reserve remains prepared to take action as needed to protect the US financial system and economy in the event that financial stresses escalate”[7] US markets soared.

India’s Prime Minister also chimed in to promise more engagement of fiscal spending on infrastructure projects[8].

Notice that outside Russia’s equity markets, the best gainers had been stock markets which made promises of rescues, particularly the India, US, Germany and France.

Ironically, the reaction has been different for those who actualized easing policies.

Australia pursued policy easing by chopping policy interest rates by 25 basis points for mortgages and business loans[9]. However, Australia’s stock market seems to have ignored the monetary stimulus by closing almost unchanged for this week.

clip_image010

More dramatically, China also did respond by cutting of interest rates for the first time since 2008, coupled with the further loosening of controls over lending and deposit rates[10]. Yet instead of recovering, China’s major equity bellwether, the Shanghai index slumped by 3.88% this week.

Again the Shanghai index also manifested the same volatility symptoms as with the rest. The difference is that the downside of China’s equity markets has been more elaborate and possibly signifies the admission of the severity or depth of China’s economic junctures and possibly too of the manifestations (or say protests) of the inadequacy of policy responses.

The point to emphasize is that financial markets has been vastly distorted and importantly, have been held hostage by politics.

As the illustrious Ayn Rand rightly explained[11],

When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion - when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing – when you see money flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft and pull than by work, and your laws don't protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed.

Risk ON-Risk OFF: Capital Flight, Bursting Bubbles and Political Gridlock

If the solution to the current crisis is about having more “stimulus”, then it would be ironic to have seen trillions upon trillions of dollars of “stimulus” thrown into the system, since 2008, and yet see the crisis linger, if not intensify.

Mainstream thinkers have been utterly lost or confused with the current situation for the simple reason that the commonsensical approach of keeping one’s house in order has been eschewed and substituted for the philosopher’s stone of bailouts and money printing. In a world based on aggregates, commonsense is a scarcity while fantasies are in abundance.

Where the problem has been about the lack of competitiveness and economic opportunities from too much regulation, bureaucracy and welfare spending, the propounded solution has been to “tax”, “spend”, “inflate”, “regulate” or “centralize” as if government can increase productivity by edict or by throwing money from helicopters.

Common sense also tells us that if these things worked we don’t need to work at all.

clip_image011

Yet when the law of diminishing returns for these interventionist measures becomes apparent, they ask for more of the same set of actions. The problem of debt requires to be solved by more debt (see above [12]). It’s like if your problem has been about alcohol then you should take more alcohol!

clip_image012

For the mainstream, money is wealth. Print money and everything gets solved. These have been the same prescription that has been complicating today’s crisis scenario with “exit” and “drachmaisation” therapy.

Yet instead of people willing to accept sacrifices for the “common good” as so expected by omniscient mainstream experts, reality reveals the opposite, people run and hide for cover.

There has been accelerating exodus of foreign money from Spain’s banking and financial system as shown above.

Dr Ed Yardeni notes[13],

According to data compiled by Spain’s central bank, foreigners reduced their deposits at Spanish credit institutions by 102.3 billion euros from a record high of 547.1 billion euros during June 2011 to 444.7 billion euros during March. In March alone, the outflow was 30.9 billion euros, and it probably accelerated during April and May…

The TARGET2 balances are more or less consistent with the trends in M2 money supply measures over the past year showing that they are falling in Spain and Greece while rising in Germany. On balance, M2 in the euro zone was up 2.8% y/y during April. This suggests that while the area's depositors are moving their funds from the periphery to the core countries, they aren’t fleeing the euro. However, the recent plunge in the euro suggests that they may be starting to shift funds into the US dollar.

Such exodus or capital flight out of the crisis affected EU nations has been destabilizing money supply conditions around the world.

Residents of these economies obviously don’t like to get robbed of their savings through the loss of purchasing power or through policies of devaluation. Devaluation theory is getting hit right smack on the faces of statist experts.

clip_image013

I pointed out last week that Swiss bonds have turned negative.

The same with Denmark’s 2 year bonds[14] as resident and foreign money flees Greece, Italy, Portugal or Spain. People from these nations would rather pay Swiss and Denmark’s central banks for safekeeping of their money than risk real losses from devaluation and the real risk of a collapse of the banking system.

clip_image015

The US Federal Reserve has partly countered the surges of capital flows by contracting their balance sheet.

This is perhaps comes along with the culmination of Operation Twist[15]—or the selling bonds with maturities of 3 years and below, which should lead to a decline of money supply and which eventually implies of negative effects on the markets. I would suspect that the gold markets have been sensing this thus the current volatility

Of course, once the episode of today’s capital flight from the Eurozone diminishes (which should amplify the money contraction), the FED will likely try to neutralize this by replacing or buy back of the assets which they earlier sold. Unfortunately the FED does not know beforehand when this will be happening, thus will only resort to reactive measures.

The uncertainty in the monetary actions should lead to heightened volatility that would be transmitted into the markets.

Hence, we should EXPECT very volatile markets ahead.

clip_image017

There could be another problem for further monetization of debts. Even if central bankers decide to print more money as another temporary patch to the current turmoil, the availability of their preferred asset[16], government bonds, has accounted for a steep decline. This implies that any future central bank purchases will likely be centered on mortgages and or privately issued securities (equities?).

The bottom line is that the combined effects of interventionism through price controls and bailouts which had prevented markets from clearing malinvestments or misallocated overpriced resources ALONG WITH sharp vacillations of capital flows as consequence of capital flight AND indecisive central bankers in the face of steroid dependent markets have been prompting for the recent market stresses.

This hasn’t been about imaginary ‘liquidity traps’ but of people’s subjective responses to perceived to political risks and policy uncertainties.

Yet as of this writing Spain has asked for $125 billion of rescue fund[17] as firewall from a potential fallout from the elections in Greece.

Does this imply a smooth sailing for the markets? We will see.

image

And as ramifications to the current dislocations in the monetary sphere out of policy indecisions and of political standoffs, it’s really hard to be unrealistically sanguine when forward indicators of factory activities have shown a synchronized decline[18]. The UK and Eurozone are in a recessionary mode, China is on the borderline while the US seems to be rolling over.

One offsetting factor has been today’s reported surge in China’s external trade[19]. Again this should be monitored rather than taken at face value given all of the above.

Yet we should ask; what if today’s (Pavlovian) stimulus conditioned markets become blasé to further promises from policy procrastination? How would the markets respond?

Again we need to seek clarity in all these than just recklessly plunging into markets centered on the belief that rescues would inherently come along and ride like a white knight to save the proverbial damsel in distress. The reality is that money does not grow on trees.

Thus we should expect the continuation of the Risk ON Risk OFF environment until concrete actions would have been taken.

It is only from here where we can have a sense of direction. And where we can assess and decide as to what position to take.

It is unfortunate that Pacquiao had to lose, but reality has long been staring at him which he denied, and may continue to deny. Many thought he was impervious and invincible too. They were all wrong.

The same with popular expectations for sustained bailouts, reality stares at our faces which we continue to deny. Yet the mounting intensity of crisis upon crisis has been admonishing us of the increasingly tenuous system. Public opinion will be proven wrong too.

Yet I am not saying that we should all be 100% cash. I am saying is that we should get less exposed to equities and overweight cash until conditions change. If the ECB and the FED collaborate on a maximum overdrive to stuff their balance sheets in exchange for green pieces of papers marked by Benjamin Franklins to the public, then we should make a swift move back into commodity based insurance positions. I suspect that come the next phase of interventions, it won’t be a risk ON risk OFF landscape but possibly one of STAGFLATION.

In the meantime be very careful out there.


[1] See On Manny Pacquiao’s Boxing Career, June 10, 2012

[2] See The RISK OFF Environment Has NOT Abated, May 27, 2012

[3] See Dealing With Financial Market Information February 27, 2012

[4] Wikipedia.org Louis Pasteur

[5] Bloomberg.com Draghi Says ECB Is Ready To Act As Growth Outlook Worsens, June 6, 2012

[6] See Eurozone’s Proposes Grand Bailout: Regional Banking Union, June 7, 2012

[7] Telegraph.co.uk Ben Bernanke says Fed ready to act if crisis intensifies, June 7, 2012

[8] See HOT: India Joins Pledge for Stimulus June 7, 2012

[9] Reuters.com ANZ cuts variable mortgage rates by 25 basis points June 8, 2012

[10] See HOT: China Cuts Lending Rates and Deposit Rates, June 7, 2012

[11] Rand, Ayn Atlas Shrugged Money padworny.com p. 387

[12] Price Tim Fixed Cobden Center March 12, 2012

[13] Yardeni, Ed Europe June 4, 2012 yardeni.com

[14] Bloomberg.com Denmark Government Bonds 2 Year Note Generic Bid Yield

[15] Wikipedia.org History of Federal Open Market Committee actions

[16] Zero Hedge, Presenting Dave Rosenberg's Complete Chartporn June 1, 2012

[17] Bloomberg.com Spain Seeks $125 Billion Bailout As Bank Crisis Worsens, June 10, 2012

[18] Yardeni Ed, Global Manufacturing June 5, 2012 yardeni.com

[19] Bloomberg.com China May Export Growth Tops Estimates As U.S. Demand Rises, June 10, 2012

Sunday, June 10, 2012

On Manny Pacquiao’s Boxing Career

This morning, much of the Philippines will be in a standstill as World Boxing champion local idol Manny Pacquiao goes back into the ring.

As a former boxing enthusiast (during my teenage days), I’d say that Manny Pacquiao is past his prime and will likely succumb to a younger player than he is, perhaps as days go by.

I’m not predicting that he will lose this or today’s match. But I am saying that the chances of continued victories will likely diminish if he persists to fight. This will be pronounced especially when he gets to fight younger boxers. It’s simply called the law of diminishing returns brought about by ageing.(unless technology comes to Mr. Pacquiao's rescue)

As a physical contact sport, age and mental condition are what fundamentally matters. Others like physical conditioning, ring technique and tactics are subordinate to this.

Unknown to many, most of Manny Pacquiao’s great victories came against pugilists older than he is (Marco Antonio Barrera, Juan Manuel Marquez, Oscar de La Hoya, Joshua Clottey, Shane Mosley) or at his age level (Ricky Hatton and Antonio Margarito). Only Miguel Cotto has proven to be the younger player whom Pacquiao recently beat.

In addition, the typical retirement age of many boxing legends is at the mid-30s.

The unbeaten Rocky Marciano made a comeback and retired by age 36. The great Muhammad Ali, my favorite hang up his gloves by age 39, but this came amidst back-to-back losses and the emergence of his Parkinson’s disease.

In short, based on the track record of great boxing legends, Pacquiao’s window of boxing greatness has been narrowing.

And there is always the psychological factor. Mike Tyson has been a great of example of a champion consumed by psychology particularly of hubris.

Mr. Pacquiao’s record as politician has not been smooth either. Corruption has been attributed to him, a recent dispute with the local tax agency the BIR shows that he is not an ally of the incumbent administration, and lastly, “God told me to retire”, for me, is a sign of admission of the actual state of his physical condition and of mental stress, where religion becomes his escape mechanism, or as means to endear himself with voters.

In reality, contrary to the popular opinion, it would not be Floyd Mayweather Jr., who will likely beat him, who again is older than Pacquiao and who is more mentality stressed than he is and will likely lose to Pacquiao, but some younger foe.

Of course reality bites, Mr. Pacquiao’s fame, fortune and political career have all been tied up with his boxing career. Once Mr. Pacquiao retires this privilege will erode overtime, as with all of the local celebrity sporting forebears.

So he may push his boxing career to the limits or take unnecessary risks in order to struggle to preserve this privilege.

[UPDATED to ADD: 28 years old Tim Bradley split decisions 33 years old Manny Pacquiao]

Saturday, December 26, 2009

Manny Pacquiao/Tiger Woods Controversies: Victory’s Thousand Fathers

ONE of the du jour topics in social gatherings I recently attended this holiday season has been the sensual indiscretions by international sporting legends as Tiger Woods and Manny Pacquiao.

Most of the discussions, like any conventional chitchat, seem to be focused on the “moral aspects” to which would appear to me as reeking in self-righteous cockamamie.


Yet, I find it appallingly a highly prejudiced view that media have opted to sensationalize what would be normally seen as stereotyped celebrity lifestyle- one has only to look at tmz.com for a daily fare on celebrity flings.


However what eludes local media is the fact that these sport champions are merely human beings whom are subject to instinctive vulnerabilities.


Considering the immense fame and wealth or the social status acquired, which is not just a relative conventional high status but of the highest strata; the attendant acclaim from their sporting feats signifies as powerful biological signaling mechanism in terms of the sexual preferences for the opposite sex in the order of Natural Selection.


In other words, some women, perhaps, may see illicit relationships or trysts with these sport heroes as being a sublime beneficiary of the 'spreading good and healthy genes', or possibly hoping to get a sliver or piggyback on the material or non-material bounties of the celebrity’s success (attention, finance, etc.).


In addition, if countless admirers would scramble to have their pictures taken with these historical figures or get autographs for posterity purposes, one can’t blame many in the opposite sex to engage in concupiscent adventurism for the same reasons.


So if musicians (mostly rock n’ roll artists) get the chicks, what more them, as still youthful world record champions?


Nevertheless, what most really fail to comprehend is that people really don’t cherish celebrities because of who they are, but because of what they have accomplished.


For instance, the fledging and budding Manny Pacquiao around 15 years ago used to train in our neighborhood in Mandaluyong (as formerly part of the Abalos stable) while yet aspiring for boxing glory, who was then a nameless aspirant who wouldn’t get anybody’s attention, nor would have sensational sexual intrigues that would elicit publicity…that is until his recent string of record world victories.


In short, fans love celebrities MOSTLY for their feats.


Hence, it would seem cursory to deduce that when the glory of victory fades, all the accompanying privileges seen today would likewise dissipate. And perhaps it is why the political spectrum seems like an alluring alternative for Mr. Pacquiao (possibly in the realization of such prospects).


Here, John F. Kennedy’s maxim reverberates, ``Victory has a thousand fathers, but defeat is an orphan.”


Bottom line: Controversies are indispensable part of the success.