Sunday, September 12, 2010

The Upcoming Boom In The Philippine Property Sector

``The dominant ideology favors “cheap money.” It also favors high commodity prices, but not always high stock market prices. The moderated interest rate is intended to stimulate production and not to cause a stock market boom. However, stock prices increase first of all. At the outset, commodity prices are not caught up in the boom. There are stock exchange booms and stock exchange profits. Yet, the “producer” is dissatisfied. He envies the “speculator” his “easy profit.” Those in power are not willing to accept this situation. They believe that production is being deprived of money which is flowing into the stock market. Besides, it is precisely in the stock market boom that the serious threat of a crisis lies hidden.” Ludwig von Mises

Here is one more prediction.

The current “boom” phase will not be limited to the stock market but will likely spread across domestic assets.

This means that over the coming years, the domestic property sector will likewise experience euphoria.

For all of the reasons mentioned above, external and internal liquidity, policy divergences between domestic and global economies, policy traction amplified by savings, suppressed real interest rate, the dearth of systemic leverage, the unimpaired banking system and underdeveloped markets—could underpin such dynamics.

clip_image002

As one would note from the ADB chart[1], following the Asian Crisis, ASEAN economies have had little exposure to property loans.

clip_image004

And despite the recent surge in property prices in developed Asia[2], this hasn’t reached frothy levels yet, except for Hong Kong.

Thus the environment of low leverage and prolonged stagnation in property values is likely to get a structural facelift from policy inducements, such as suppressed interest rates which are likely to trigger an inflation fuelled boom by generating massive misdirection of resources-or malinvestments.

Of course many would argue on a myriad of tangential or superficial reasons: economic growth, rising middle class, urbanization and etc... But these would mainly signify as mainstream drivels, as media and the experts will seek to rationalize market action on anything that would seem fashionable.

And the business cycle will be left unheard of until perhaps the realization of a bust.

As Murray N. Rothbard explained[3] (bold emphasis mine)

``For businessmen, seeing the rate of interest fall, react as they always would and must to such a change of market signals: They invest more in capital and producers' goods. Investments, particularly in lengthy and time-consuming projects, which previously looked unprofitable now seem profitable, because of the fall of the interest charge. In short, businessmen react as they would react if savings had genuinely increased: They expand their investment in durable equipment, in capital goods, in industrial raw material, in construction as compared to their direct production of consumer goods.

``Businesses, in short, happily borrow the newly expanded bank money that is coming to them at cheaper rates; they use the money to invest in capital goods, and eventually this money gets paid out in higher rents to land, and higher wages to workers in the capital goods industries. The increased business demand bids up labor costs, but businesses think they can pay these higher costs because they have been fooled by the government-and-bank intervention in the loan market and its decisively important tampering with the interest-rate signal of the marketplace.”

clip_image006

If I read into the price actions of the major components of the publicly listed Philippine property sector, arranged according to biggest weighting: Ayala Land (ALI-black candle), SM Prime Holdings (SMPH-gray line), Megaworld (MEG-blue line), Robinsons Land (RLC-maroon line), Filinvest Land (FLI-green), Belle Resources (BEL-pink) Vista Land (VLL-red) and SM Development Corp (SMDC-orange) they seem to chime on the same tune—a forthcoming property boom.

And please don’t insist of any outlandish and unproven micro-fundamental based actions (earnings, dividends and etc...) because the picture clearly shows that in the uniformity of price actions, there isn’t any.

Instead it has clearly been my Machlup-Livermore paradigm at work.


[1] ADB.org Asian Economic Monitor, July 2010

[2] Deutsche Bank, Asian property markets: No significant bubbles – yet!, June 23, 2010

[3] Rothbard, Murray N. Economic Depressions: Their Cause and Cure

Friday, September 10, 2010

3 Philippine Firms Among Forbes Asia’s Top 200 Smallest and Midsize Companies

Forbes magazine issued its index of the 200 top small scale and midsized companies of Asia (with $1 billion revenues and below)

Some highlights presented by Forbes:

-China maintains the most with 71 but is down from 78 last year

-Indian companies shot up to 39 from 20 last year

-Vietnam made a debut with Vinamilk

-only 2 Japanese companies made cut down from 24 last year

-151 names are new compared to 2009 list

-technology companies (hardware and software) seem to be making the growth inroads as well health care issues

Additional comment:

Among the ASEAN 4: Thailand has 11, Malaysia has 7, Philippines has 3 while Indonesia has one

See the complete list here

For the Philippines: They include Lopez Holdings (classified as media), Pacific Online system (household products) and Philweb (software services)

See charts below: (note: this does NOT in anyway represent a stock TIP)

Lopez Holdings (LPZ)

clip_image002

Pacific Online (LOTO)

clip_image004

Philweb (WEB)

clip_image006

Cyberspace: A Battleground Between Socialism and Free Markets

Governments are going to have a hard time trying to control the cyber space.

Default template

According to the Economist,

GOVERNMENTS are increasingly finding ways to enforce their laws in the digital realm. The most prominent is China’s “great firewall”. But China is by no means the only country erecting borders in cyberspace. The OpenNet Initiative, an advocacy group, lists more than a dozen countries that block internet content for political, social and security reasons. They do not need especially clever technology: governments go increasingly after dominant online firms because they are easy to get hold of. In April Google published the numbers of requests it had received from official agencies to remove content or provide information about users.

Based on his recent article, security expert Bruce Schneier would say that web regulation is a folly.

That’s because of three things:

1. It would mean a massive war against deepening spontaneous order, division of labor and diversity.

Internet is the largest communications system mankind has ever created, and it works because it is distributed. There is no central authority. No nation is in charge. Plugging all the holes isn't possible.

2. To engage in cyberspace control means censorship. It’s also a war waged against the spread of knowledge with stark ramifications.

The second flawed assumption is that we can predict the effects of such a shutdown. The Internet is the most complex machine mankind has ever built

3. The complexities of the cyberspace extrapolates to manifold loopholes and action-reaction dynamics.

The third flawed assumption is that we could build this capability securely. We can't. Once we engineered a selective shutdown switch into the Internet, and implemented a way to do what Internet engineers have spent decades making sure never happens, we would have created an enormous security vulnerability. We would make the job of any would-be terrorist intent on bringing down the Internet much easier.

Mr. Schneier concludes,

Computer and network security is hard, and every Internet system we've ever created has security vulnerabilities. It would be folly to think this one wouldn't as well. And given how unlikely the risk is, any actual shutdown would be far more likely to be a result of an unfortunate error or a malicious hacker than of a presidential order. But the main problem with an Internet kill switch is that it's too coarse a hammer. Yes, the bad guys use the Internet to communicate, and they can use it to attack us. But the good guys use it, too, and the good guys far outnumber the bad guys. Shutting the Internet down, either the whole thing or just a part of it, even in the face of a foreign military attack would do far more damage than it could possibly prevent. And it would hurt others whom we don't want to hurt.

At the end of the day, one of the two forces (free markets versus socialism) would have to yield. Guess who?

Even Fidel Castro Seems To Have Given Up On Socialism

Still dreaming of the magic of socialism?

Even practitioner Cuba’s former president Fidel Castro seems to have given up on the failed model.

This from Yahoo news.

Fidel Castro told a visiting American journalist that Cuba's communist economic model doesn't work, a rare comment on domestic affairs from a man who has conspicuously steered clear of local issues since stepping down four years ago.

The fact that things are not working efficiently on this cash-strapped Caribbean island is hardly news. Fidel's brother Raul, the country’s president, has said the same thing repeatedly. But the blunt assessment by the father of Cuba's 1959 revolution is sure to raise eyebrows.

Jeffrey Goldberg, a national correspondent for The Atlantic magazine, asked if Cuba's economic system was still worth exporting to other countries, and Castro replied: "The Cuban model doesn't even work for us anymore" Goldberg wrote Wednesday in a post on his Atlantic blog.

clip_image001

To put things in perspective, Cato’s Dan Mitchell observes that economic growth in Cuba has stagnated throughout the years of socialism. This is sharply in contrast to Chile whose economic growth has exploded following the latter’s embrace of economic freedom.

From Mr. Mitchell, (bold emphasis mine)

This chart, comparing inflation-adjusted per-capita GDP in Chile and Cuba, is a good illustration of the human cost of excessive government. Living standards in Cuba have languished. In Chile, by contrast, the embrace of market-friendly policies has resulted in a huge increase in prosperity. Chileans were twice as rich as Cubans when Castro seized control of the island. After 50 years of communism in Cuba and 30 years of liberalization in Chile, the gap is now much larger.

Thus, I am reminded by the prescience of Mr. Ludwig von Mises who again has been validated when he wrote... (bold emphasis mine)

All efforts to realize Socialism lead only to the destruction of society. Factories, mines, and railways will come to a standstill, towns will be deserted. The population of the industrial territories will die out or migrate elsewhere. The farmer will return to the self-sufficiency of the closed, domestic economy. Without private ownership in the means of production there is, in the long run, no production other than a hand-to-mouth production for one's own needs...

It might so happen that some nations would remain socialistic while others returned to Capitalism. Then the socialist countries alone would proceed towards social decline. The capitalist countries would progress to a higher development of the division of labour until at last, driven by the fundamental social law to draw the greatest number of human beings into the personal division of labour, and the whole earth's surface into the geographical division of labour, they would impose culture upon the backward nations or destroy them if they resisted. This has always been the historical fate of nations who have eschewed the road of capitalist development or who have halted prematurely upon it.

Socialism is ever the elusive utopia which appears to thrive successfully only in the mindset of those who refuse the functionalities of the real world.

Thursday, September 09, 2010

Are Food Shortages The Result of Extreme Weather?

This news from yahoo says so,

Deadly riots in the streets of Mozambique over sharply higher food prices have left 13 dead. Anger is growing in Egypt and Serbia as well. Panicked Russian shoppers have cleared the shelves of staple grains. And the devastating floods that have left as many as 10 million Pakistanis homeless are also raising concerns about the country's ability to feed itself.

A series of isolated disasters? Not at all. The common thread: extreme weather, which is putting pressure on food supplies around the globe.

Like any politically biased article, this seems focused on a post hoc fallacy (after this, therefore because of this) argument.

Extreme weather conditions has exacerbated but not caused the existing imbalances or shortages.

In almost every instance, shortages happens when the price mechanism isn’t allowed to function.

clip_image002

And because agriculture is one of the most, if not the most, politically sensitive sector in any economy, it has been the least open to international commerce, hence, the inherent imbalances from the lack of trade and investments which extrapolates to reduced output or the lack of supply. In short, supply constrains have been caused by government policies which has distorted the price mechanism.

This is especially accentuated in developing economies whom lacks capital to develop idle lands which has been aggravated by aforementioned protectionist measures.

Subsequently this has resulted to a massive loss in productivity from the underlying mismatch in the yield gaps and the land availability (abundance of fallowed lands) as shown below by the most recent World Bank Study Rising Global Interest In Farmlands.

clip_image004

Of course, the law of demand and supply has always been at work, such that in the recent episode where food prices spiked in 2007-8 combined with the recent trends of globalization, governments have used current dynamics to exploit on these gaps by allowing for crossborder investments (seen below).

clip_image006

So obviously the answer to the problem of shortages is to allow markets to function, which hopefully the du jour acceptance of globalization might diffuse openness into the world’s agriculture sector.

And of course, no one has been talking about the way global governments have been printing money which has been artificially boosting demand for food and obversely depreciating value of currency relative to real goods.

For the mainstream, what is NOT sensational but real, hardly matters.

Wednesday, September 08, 2010

Quote of the Day: The Future of Labor

Here is a great post labor day quote from marketing guru Seth Godin,

In a world where labor does exactly what it's told to do, it will be devalued. Obedience is easily replaced, and thus one worker is as good as another. And devalued labor will be replaced by machines or cheaper alternatives. We say we want insightful and brilliant teachers, but then we insist they do their labor precisely according to a manual invented by a committee...

Companies that race to the bottom in terms of the skill or cost of their labor end up with nothing but low margins. The few companies that are able to race to the top, that can challenge workers to bring their whole selves--their human selves--to work, on the other hand, can earn stability and growth and margins. Improvisation still matters if you set out to solve interesting problems.

The future of labor isn't in less education, less OSHA and more power to the boss. The future of labor belongs to enlightened, passionate people on both sides of the plant, people who want to do work that matters.

In the ongoing transition to the information age, investments, trade and jobs will require increasing patterns of diversity and specialization. And as pointed out by Mr. Godin, those who focus on the mediocre will suffer from commoditized wages and profit margins and will be subjected to rigors of tight competition.

Finally, this also shows how labor, like capital, isn’t homogeneous.

The Rationalization Phase Begins: ‘Golden Era’ Equals The ‘New Paradigm’?

As George Soros would probably say this would represent as the ‘growing conviction’ phase, as prices begin to influence fundamentals and people’s outlook by rationalizing price action for real changes.

This from Bloomberg,

Philippine and Malaysian stock markets may soon end 16 years of stagnation and enter a “golden era,” according to CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets technical analysts.

The Philippine Stock Exchange Index is testing its record high reached on Oct. 8, 2007, after fluctuating between support at 975 to 1,075 and resistance at 3,447 to 3,896 since 1993, CLSA analysts led by Laurence Balanco said. The FTSE Bursa Malaysia KLCI Index is also poised for a breakout after it “drifted net-sideways” below the 1,332 to 1,524 range since 1994, the analysts wrote in a report.

The “secular bear markets” in the two Southeast Asian countries may be similar to ones in South Korea from 1989 to 2005, Indonesia from 1990 to 2004, India from 1992 to 2004, Singapore from 1994 to 2006, and the U.S. from 1966 to 1982, according to CLSA. Since then, benchmark indexes in the five countries have rallied at least 51 percent and posted gains of as much as 282 percent, the analysts said.

“If the PSE index and the KLCI are to adhere to these common secular bear market patterns, then both markets are on the cusp of entering a new long-term bull market phase,” the analysts wrote.

A “conclusive” breakout above 3,896 could take the Philippine gauge to 6,752 “in the years to come,” according to the analysts. Still, they said the market may yet pause as it approaches the resistance zone and as the benchmark index completes a five-wave sequence from the October 2008 low.

clip_image002

Golden Era equals the “New Paradigm”?

Sunday, September 05, 2010

Should Your Housemaid Invest In The Stock Market?

``Demanding immediate success invariable leads to playing the fads or fashions currently performing well rather than investing on a solid basis. A course of investment, once charted, should be given time to work. Patience is a crucial but rare investment commodity. The problem is not as simple as it may appear; studies have shown that businessmen and other investors abhor uncertainty. To most people in the market place, quick input-output matching is an expected condition of successful investing.” David Dreman, Contrarian Investment Strategies: The Next Generation

Should your housemaid invest in the stock market?

All Actions Are A Function Of Tradeoffs

Recently, I chance upon a message advocating housemaids to invest their money in the stock market. The supposed goal is to help the underprivileged financially by capitalizing on the rising markets.

While I would agree with the underlying motive, the basic problem with this idea is that purported intentions hardly square with reality.

In the real world, all actions have consequences. And actions are driven by the preferences (value scale) and incentives of individuals to seek relief from discomfort.

In short, people’s actions represent purposeful behaviour.

As the great Ludwig von Mises explains[1], (all bold highlights mine)

``Acting man is eager to substitute a more satisfactory state of affairs for a less satisfactory. His mind imagines conditions which suit him better, and his action aims at bringing about this desired state. The incentive that impels a man to act is always some uneasiness. A man perfectly content with the state of his affairs would have no incentive to change things. He would have neither wishes nor desires; he would be perfectly happy. He would not act; he would simply live free from care.”

``But to make a man act, uneasiness and the image of a more satisfactory state alone are not sufficient. A third condition is required: the expectation that purposeful behavior has the power to remove or at least to alleviate the felt uneasiness. In the absence of this condition no action is feasible. Man must yield to the inevitable. He must submit to destiny.”

This means that the consequences of everyone’s action for betterment can have short term or long term effects. Hence, in a world of scarcity, everyone’s action is a consequence of a tradeoff in personal values and preferences.

And one cannot isolate actions taken by individuals from these underlying influences, even from the perspective of impulses.

Again from von Mises[2],

``He who acts under an emotional impulse also acts. What distinguishes an emotional action from other actions is the valuation of input and output. Emotions disarrange valuations. Inflamed with passion, man sees the goal as more desirable and the price he has to pay for it as less burdensome than he would in cool deliberation. Men have never doubted that even in the state of emotion means and ends are pondered and that it is possible to influence the outcome of this deliberation by rendering more costly the yielding to the passionate impulse.”

Take for instance in the recent infamous hostage taking[3] (at the Luneta Grandstand in the Philippines), which has now become a political controversy.

Some have suggested that the actions of the criminal signified that of a fit of rage. True, but again it was choice made from a tradeoff of what the culprit sees as a better way to resolve a personal unease or predicament.

In other words, a choice had been made based on short term time horizon (immediate gratification) which alternatively meant the failure of the felon’s emotional intelligence which paved way for a severe miscalculation that proved to be fatal for him, the victims and politically strained the relations diplomatic between the nationalities involved in the unfortunate incident.

Also there is a suggestion that the perceived depravity of the due process which prompted for the criminal’s misdeeds should be detached. False. Again people are driven by purposeful behaviour where actions and motives are inseparable, interrelated or intertwined, again from the Professor Mises[4], “It is impossible for the human mind to conceive a mode of action whose categories would differ from the categories which determine our own actions”

The point of the above is to show you that people’s choices are ALWAYS based on tradeoffs, all of which comes with intertemporal (occurring across time) consequences, positive or negative, where good intentions can lead to the opposite of the desired goals.

Housemaids And The Bubble Cycle

And how does this apply to the wisdom of housemaids investing in the markets?

The fundamental reason for such advocacy is predicated on the broadening expectation of the linearity of the ongoing trend (see figure 1).

clip_image002

Figure 1: Bloomberg: The ASEAN Bull Market

As earlier explained[5], the ASEAN bullmarket appears to be segueing into what billionaire George Soros calls as the “growing conviction” phase of the boom cycle.

This simply means that as the uptrend becomes more entrenched, people will intuitively flock to where the returns are. In behavioural finance this is called the herding effect or the Herd Behavior.

Indonesia (JCI, green) is the first among the contemporaries to surpass the 2007 highs. All the rest, particularly Philippines, (PCOMP yellow), Malaysia (KLSI, orange) and Thailand (SET, red) appear to be at the threshold of testing their 2007 highs.

The point of my showing the synchronous action of ASEAN markets is to demonstrate that this hasn’t been mainly because of national political-economic issues, but because of other variables UNSEEN by the public or by even most of the experts. Yet among the popular experts, who at the start of the year, predicted that the Phisix will likely break 3,800?

Here is what I wrote in May 2009[6],

``Nonetheless, if the Phisix does end the year above 2,500, we may expect a full recovery (Phisix 3,800) by the end of 2010 or even an attempt at the 5,000.”

5,000 may seem too optimistic but one can’t discount the acceleration of the speed and depth of the shaping bullmarket. Sri Lanka and Bangladesh for instance on a year to date basis is up astoundingly by 73% and 49% respectively, compared to the Phisix at 22%[7] which makes ASEAN bourses look dismal. At any rate, my predictions are mostly becoming a reality.

And where money is seen as being picked up on the streets, even housemaids will, by their volition, perhaps prodded or influenced by their peers or their household employers, will gravitate to “easy money”.

Remember the stock market is a social phenomenon driven by expectations, whether these expectations are valid or not[8].

And the rising tide compels people to make various attributions to market actions, such as economic growth or earnings or mergers and acquisitions, no matter how loosely correlated they are or how little relevance they are with the genuine market drivers. Most of this account for as popular dogmatic fables or widely held superstitions as evidences does not support the causality nexus from such premises.

What has been driving today’s stock markets has been the tsunami of liquidity, or what I have long called as the Machlup-Livermore[9] paradigm, from the coordinated monetary policies by global central banks in an attempt to forestall the “deflation” bogeyman.

And these policies have had relative effects on the marketplace, where areas largely unblemished from the recent bubble implosion appear to have been “positively” influenced. This seems quite evident in the markets of the periphery more than that of the developed economies, from which most of these policies have been directed.

I say positive, in the context, where rising markets are being misconstrued as signs of rising prosperity, which is illusory, when in fact what such dynamic account for is the tacit depreciation of the currency, but presently seen in the dynamic of “asset price inflation”. As we have long said, these are symptoms of the seductive sweet-spot phase of inflation. Heck, why has gold been rising against ALL currencies[10], if this hasn’t been so?

Eventually this illusion morphs into nasty bubbles (see figure2), or at worst, inflation spiralling out of control.

clip_image004

Figure 2: World Bank: Paper Money and Banking Crisis

And it is NO coincidence that since the world went off the quasi gold standard of the Bretton Woods system in 1971 the account of banking crisis globally have exploded.

Why?

Because inflation, as a short term fix is like narcotics, is addicting.

Again Professor Mises[11],

``The popularity of inflation and credit expansion, the ultimate source of the repeated attempts to render people prosperous by credit expansion, and thus the cause of the cyclical fluctuations of business, manifests itself clearly in the customary terminology. The boom is called good business, prosperity, and upswing. Its unavoidable aftermath, the readjustment of conditions to the real data of the market, is called crisis, slump, bad business, depression. People rebel against the insight that the disturbing element is to be seen in the malinvestment and the overconsumption of the boom period and that such an artificially induced boom is doomed. They are looking for the philosophers' stone to make it last.

In short, the paper money-fractional reserve central banking system induces boom bust cycles only shifts around the world. And ASEAN economies, as well as other peripheral emerging economies, seem like candidates to a formative bubble.

And this is why we also have long been saying of a Phisix 10,000[12] or the potential of the Philippine Phisix to reach bubble proportions sometime in the future.

If experts hardly grasp the dynamic of bubble cycles, how the heck do you expect housemaids to understand?

The Housemaid Indicator

Housemaids investing in the stock markets have NOT been unusual. During the acme of the bubble cycle in China in 2008, the onrush of retail punters into stocks, which included housemaids, signified the peak of frenzied activities.

As Shujie Yao Dan Luo of The University of Nottingham wrote in their recent study[13], (emphasis added)

``Most of these investors, which included farmers, cleaners, taxi drivers and house maids, knew little about stock markets and how share prices were determined. Many of these people started investing in the stock markets when prices had already risen rapidly to peak levels, just before the market bubble burst. The participation of these ‘envious’ investors artificially prolonged the bullish market and created a much larger market bubble than would have occurred had they not become involved.”

In short, retail investors GOT SINGED and were left HOLDING THE EMPTY BAG. They accounted for as the FOOL in the Greater Fool Theory.

Former Morgan Stanley analyst Andy Xie describes the “Maid Indicator” as great way of looking at market tops, he says[14],

``Now housemaids are in the market. Who else? Never underestimate 1.3 billion people. In China, they say you should take the shoeshine boy’s advice. Many would listen to him. Welcome to China, the land of getting rich quick.”

In other words, retail money represents unintelligent money. Retail money is mostly drawn into the prospects of free lunches and who turn stock markets into casino-like gambling orgies. They signify as the culmination of irrational behaviour.

A most recent example has been in the US markets, where there has been a pronounced shift of retail investors OUT of stocks and INTO bonds.

And guess what? It would appear that the counterpart of the Maid Indicator or the RETAIL money indicator is accurate (figure 3).

clip_image006

Figure 3: Retail Investors Hardly Gets Investing Right

As the New York Times highlighted on this monumental shift, markets immediately sprung to the opposite direction against the bets of retail money.

As I recently wrote[15], ``I’d suggest that, like always, they are wrong and betting against them (in stocks) would likely be a profitable exercise.”

By the way things are developing, I could be validated anew.

And like my son’s finance professor who initially required that he and his classmates to invest in the stock markets for the semester (four months), to which I argued against, and instead told my son that his professor speak to me, it must be understood that profiting from stock markets is NOT a function of three or four months exposure unless one is positioned as a PUNTER than an investor.

Stock Market investing, like all other successful endeavours requires diligence, perseverance, perceptiveness and patience. And importantly, unlike other professions, it also requires the ability to think independently and to resist social or peer pressures, which alternatively means going against the crowd or popular wisdom even to the risk of ostracism.

For instance the world’s most successful stock market investor Mr. Warren Buffett, at the height of the dot.com boom was labelled a “dinosaur” for avoiding investments in technology companies. In hindsight, he was vindicated. His advice[16], “If you’re applauded, worry. Great moves are usually greeted by yawns.”

The same holds true with the fallacious notion of learning from simulated stock market games. When one deals with “monopoly” play money, the tendency is to GET aggressive because there is no real cost. To lose is simply a game. Yet repeated exposure to simulated games could amplify risk tolerance and aggressiveness at the expense of profit opportunities.

In other words, simulated trading games impart the wrong traits or attitudes in dealing with the financial markets. Since the market is a function of social actions, the understanding of people’s behaviour and the direction of such actions is a MUST.

Yet one must be reminded that since everyone has different value scales and preferences, these can’t be quantified or seen in aggregates, which has been the major flaw of mainstream economics.

Investing Is NO Free Lunch

Let me be clear with my position, I am not opposed to ANYONE, including maids, from engaging the markets. What I am vehemently opposed with is the idea of free lunches as path to prosperity.

Anyone who engages in the markets must be capable to deal with the intertemporal tradeoffs between risks and rewards.

Because every action has a consequence, the inability to reckon with such tradeoffs could translate into future losses far greater than any interim gains.

Another thing which I am rabidly opposed with is the pretentious morality of uplifting the underprivileged by advocating unnecessary exposure on the stock markets when the participants are under qualified to comprehend or imbue on the attendant risks involved.

To expose people to future losses which could be far greater than the current gains defeats the goal of social advancement.

Just ask the horde of speculators of the US housing bubble who had been apparent “victims” of Federal Reserve and US government policies. They who profited at first have now been suffering from the losses out of excessive speculations. These gullible participants were lured and abetted by the immoral policies of turning stones into bread.

Yet failed policies do NOT exonerate the individual’s recklessness because many have seen the potential impact of bubble policies prior to the bust per se. Warnings were unheeded because of the enticements of social pressure and the seeming perpetuation of rising prices.

And such consequentialist notion where “the ends justify the means” or the consequences of actions serving as moral propriety also fails to account for the tradeoff between present and future ramifications from such actions. Teaching housemaids to engage in risky ventures without the necessary understanding of risks is tantamount to gambling.

Another way to say it is that the reorientation of people’s behaviour towards reckless undertakings which is likely to result to adverse consequences is not morally justifiable nor is gambling, in anyway, going to create financial upliftment.

If the retail under qualified entities (housemaids, drivers or low skilled workers) insists on investing in the financial markets, then the right approach would be to let experts handle their money via mutual funds or UITF (Unit Investment Trust Funds) or through pooled discretionary accounts with able and qualified fund managers.

Yet, even if the experts do manage their accounts, the communication of the tradeoffs between risks and rewards should be a prerequisite or a sine qua non for the simple reason of harmonizing the expectations of the client and managers.

Unmatched expectations are often the root of most conflicts. In the financial markets, expectations in time preferences could be a principal source friction for a principal-agent relationship.

Thus, we go back to the simple operating precept: investing is NO Free lunch, period. That has to be understood by both retail investors (housemaids) and fund managers. Anybody who says otherwise is either being untruthful or deceiving oneself or the other party.

Beware of false prophets.


[1] Mises, Ludwig von The Prerequisites of Human Action, Human Action Chapter 1 Section 2

[2] Ibid

[3] See The Bloodbath At Rizal Park Hostage Drama Demonstrates The Pathology of Government, August 24, 2010

[4] Mises, Ludwig von The Alter Ego Human Action Chapter 1 Section 6

[5] See How To Go About The Different Phases of The Bullmarket Cycle, August 23, 2010

[6] See Kentucky Derby And The Global Stock Market, May 10 2009

[7] See Global Stock Markets Update: Peripheral Markets Take Center Stage, September 4, 2009

[8] See A Primer On Stock Markets-Why It Isn’t Generally A Gambling Casino, January 9, 2009

[9] See Are Stock Market Prices Driven By Earnings or Inflation?, January 25, 2009

[10] Gold.org, Daily gold price in a range of currencies since January 2000

[11] Mises Ludwig von, The Market Economy as Affected by the Recurrence of the Trade Cycle, Chapter 20 Section 9

[12] See Phisix 10,000:Clues From Philippine Bond Offering, July 15, 2009.

This has been a long held prediction of mine even prior to the last bubble cycle. The 2007-2008 bearmarket I had interpreted as a countercyclical trend in a secular uptrend. The current underlying secular trend reverses once the bubble dynamic, cultivated domestically, implodes. This has NOT been the case in the 2007-2008, which was largely a function of global contagion. This also why fundamentals (economic performances, earnings, etc..) and market actions went on the opposite ways serves as proof of the disconnect between popular wisdom and reality.

[13] Yao, Shujie and Lou, Dan Chinese Stock Market Bubble: Inevitable Or Incidental? University of Nottingham

[14] Investmentmoats.com, Andy Xie: Housemaid indicator says Chinese Bubble near to burst, April 28, 2010

[15] See US Markets: What Small Investors Fleeing Stocks Means, August 23, 2010

[16] KPMG.com "If you're applauded, worry"

Saturday, September 04, 2010

Global Stock Markets Update: Peripheral Markets Take Center Stage

Going into the last quarter of the year, Bespoke Invest has a great snapshot of what has been happening in global stock markets.

clip_image002

From Bespoke Invest, (bold highlights mine)

The average year to date change for all 82 countries is 5.39%, while the median change is 2.23%. The S&P 500's year to date change of -1.24% is obviously below both of these. The US currently ranks 53rd out of 82 in terms of 2010 performance. At the top of the list is Sri Lanka with a 2010 gain of 73.69%. Bangladesh ranks second at 49.37%, followed by Estonia (41.94%), Ukraine (40.86%), and Latvia (40.26%).

India has been the best performing BRIC country so far this year with a gain of 4.33%. Russia ranks second at 1.42%, Brazil ranks third at -2.43%, and China is down the most at -18.97%. Canada is currently the top G7 country with a gain of 3.26%. Germany and Britain are the other two G7 countries that are up year to date, while Japan is the G7 country that is down the most year to date (-13.58%). Overall, Bermuda has seen the biggest losses this year with a decline of 38.25%. Greece is the second worst at -24.56%.

Additional comments:

1. Global stock markets are MOSTLY higher from a year-to-date basis, be it in terms of average or median changes or in nominal distribution (53 up against 29 down). This hardly evinces of the ballyhooed “double dip”.

2. The best performance has been at the periphery (as previously discussed), particularly in emerging South Asia, the Baltic States (Estonia have been a favourite since she has adapted a laissez faire leaning approach in dealing with the most recent bubble bust) and ASEAN.

This appears to be manifestations of the “leash effect” from policy divergences.

3. The BRICS has underperformed, but that’s because of last year’s outperformance. This excludes China, whose markets have repeatedly been under pressure from government intervention. I expect the BRICs to likewise pick-up, perhaps at the end of the year or in 2011 (perhaps including China).

4. Major East Asian economies have likewise underperformed. But this appears to reflect on the actions of major OECD economies.

Overall, what we seem to be seeing has been a spillover dynamic from the prodigious liquidity generated from coordinated global monetary policies into the peripheral markets. It’s the impact of inflation on asset prices on a relative scale. In addition, this also reflect signs of the allure of inflation’s “sweet spot” phase, especially for the peripheral markets.

As a caveat, while stock markets do resemble some signs of “decoupling”, such divergences can be deceiving.

Decoupling can only be established once the US goes into a recession while peripheral markets and their respective economies ignore this.

Yet, I doubt this will occur.

Thursday, September 02, 2010

The Inflating Bubble In The Global Currency Markets

The mainstream says there has been NO inflation or inflation hardly poses as a risk.

Unfortunately this view ignores the relative and uneven effects of inflation on the markets and the economies.

Usually, the initial manifestations are seen in the asset markets.

And at present, the currency markets looks like a key absorber of inflationism (aside from US treasuries).

clip_image002

According to the Wall Street Journal,

``The $4 trillion mark represents a 20% gain from $3.3 trillion in 2007, the last time the global foreign-exchange markets were surveyed, according to the Bank for International Settlements. While the survey found continued growth in currency trading, it did reflect a slowdown in the market's growth from the prior survey, when trading volumes had soared 69% from $1.9 trillion in 2004.”

So money printing worldwide seems to be getting a new outlet as more and more people trade a wider dimension of currencies.

Again from the WSJ (bold emphasis mine)

The survey showed how investors are seeking out faster-growing economies and big commodity producers. Trading volume between the U.S. dollar and the Australian dollar rose 35% from 2007, and volume with the Canadian dollar was up 44%. Trading also jumped in the Indian rupee, Chinese yuan and Brazilian real. In contrast, trading in the U.S. dollar against the British pound, a mainstay of the currency markets, fell 6%. Trading in the euro against the dollar rose 23%.

It’s not just globalization of trade, but globalization of asset inflation.

Of course, the US dollar remains as the de facto currency pair of most currency trades.

Again the WSJ (bold highlights mine)

Overall, the U.S. dollar remained the dominant global currency. It accounted for 84.9% of transactions, down from 85.6% in 2007. The euro's share rose to 39.1% from 37%. The share count data add up to 200%, to reflect the fact that there are two currencies in each transaction.

One should note that the trading the currency market means exposing oneself to highly leveraged positions.

The WSJ,

Currently, investors can borrow $100 for every dollar they invest. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission, which regulates foreign-exchange trading in the U.S., tried to cut that amount to $10.

And that again they are mostly used by financial institutions, the WSJ... (bold emphasis added)

The foreign-exchange market is actually a network of bank dealers and electronic-trading systems. At its core are investors or corporations needing to convert one currency into another, either as they buy or sell a stock or bond from another country or bring home profits earned abroad. For example, any time a U.S. investor buys a Japanese stock or a German company buys parts from a Korean supplier, a foreign-exchange trade occurs.

Banks are also heavy users of the currency markets to convert cash they borrow from foreign investors. Mutual-fund managers overseeing portfolios of foreign stocks may use currency derivatives to offset the impact of exchange-rate swings on those investments. And finally, there are speculators, such as hedge funds and mutual funds, who place bets on whether individual currencies will rise or fall.

Derivatives, carry trade and all those sophisticated and complex arbitrages which played a major role in the last bubble bust seems to be a significant contributor to the explosion of the volume trades in the currency markets.

For a broader perspective, the WSJ provides us with a comparison of the currency markets with other financial markets...

The currency market is by far the world's largest financial market. It dwarfs U.S. stock trading, which in April averaged about $134 billion a day, down from a daily average of $148 billion in 2007, according to data compiled by the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association. Even trading in U.S. Treasurys, among the biggest markets in the world, averaged $456 billion a day in April, down from an average of $570 billion for all of 2007.

Now small investors are increasing their foreign-currency exposure. They are piling into mutual funds which make bets on currencies as a core part of their strategy. More broadly, U.S. stock mutual funds that invest overseas have taken in $42 billion over the past year, according to Morningstar Inc.

So the ingredients of a bubble seem all in place: high leverage, massive interventions, complex instruments and irrational behavior.

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Is Sound Money Incompatible With Democracy?

One of the recent feedbacks I received is the attribution that sound money can’t be compatible with democracy. The implication is that inflationism is an indispensable instrument for democratic survival.

Of course, this assertion accounts no less than an arrant bunk (nonsense) for the following reasons:

One, this serves as an example of argumentum ad populum (appeal to popularity), where the belief of the many holds that the argument is true.

Just because many seek to live off at the expense of the others this doesn’t mean that their demands are necessarily justifiable or valid and should be provided for.

This is similar to the unwisdom of the crowds which we have recently critiqued. Moreover, these proponents seem oblivious to the fact that populist policies tend to self-destruct overtime. What is unsustainable won’t last.

Second, the alleged incompatibility is also misleading because this operates on the premises of the 'tyranny of the majority' or the rule of the mob.

Say for example, 10 persons get stuck in a remote island where only one of them is a woman. Yet 6 of the male elected to force themselves on her. Is the majority’s action justified? The answer is obviously NO. The means to an end isn’t justified by mere numbers.

What is needed is the rule of law, of which inflationism chafes at.

As Friedrich A. von Hayek wrote in the Decline of the Rule of Law, Part 1

The main point is that, in the use of its coercive powers, the discretion of the authorities should be so strictly bound by laws laid down beforehand that the individual can foresee with fair certainty how these powers will be used in particular instances; and that the laws themselves are truly general and create no privileges for class or person because they are made in view of their long-run effects and therefore in necessary ignorance of who will be the particular individuals who will be benefited or harmed by them. That the law should be an instrument to be used by the individuals for their ends and not an instrument used upon the people by the legislators is the ultimate meaning of the Rule of Law.

Three, the collectivist charade is to sell popular wisdom to the economic ignoramus. The collectivists forget to tell everyone that inflationism is a redistribution scheme which benefits the minority at the expense of society.

As Jörg Guido Hülsmann wrote in Deflation and Liberty (emphasis added)

``Inflation is an unjustifiable redistribution of income in favor of those who receive the new money and money titles first, and to the detriment of those who receive them last. In practice the redistribution always works out in favor of the fiat-money producers themselves (whom we misleadingly call central banks) and of their partners in the banking sector and at the stock exchange. And of course inflation works out to the advantage of governments and their closest allies in the business world. Inflation is the vehicle through which these individuals and groups enrich themselves, unjustifiably, at the expense of the citizenry at large. If there is any truth to the socialist caricature of capitalism—an economic system that exploits the poor to the benefit of the rich—then this caricature holds true for a capitalist system strangulated by inflation. The relentless influx of paper money makes the wealthy and powerful richer and more powerful than they would be if they depended exclusively on the voluntary support of their fellow citizens. And because it shields the political and economic establishment of the country from the competition emanating from the rest of society, inflation puts a brake on social mobility. The rich stay rich (longer) and the poor stay poor (longer) than they would in a free society.”

Fourth, what collectivists see as essential is actually the opposite. History reveals that democracy and sound money has had and can have a symbiotic relationship.

In The Gold Standard, Indirect Exchange section of the epic Human Action, Ludwig von Mises wrote, (bold emphasis mine)

``The gold standard was the world standard of the age of capitalism, increasing welfare, liberty, and democracy, both political and economic. In the eyes of the free traders its main eminence was precisely the fact that it was an international standard as required by international trade and the transactions of the international money and capital market. It was the medium of exchange by means of which Western industrialism and Western capital had borne Western civilization into the remotest parts of the earth's surface, everywhere destroying the fetters of age-old prejudices and superstitions, sowing the seeds of new life and new well-being, freeing minds and souls, and creating riches unheard of before. It accompanied the triumphal unprecedented progress of Western liberalism ready to unite all nations into a community of free nations peacefully cooperating with one another.”

Finally, the hucksters of false promises of inflationism are no less than blinded by economic dogma whose foundations seem to operate outside the realm of the law of scarcity—yes fantasyland.

As Ron Paul wrote on Why Governments Hate Gold, (bold emphasis mine)

``Time and again it has been proven that the Keynesian system of big government and fiat paper money are abject failures in the long run. However, the nature of government is to ignore reality when there is an avenue that allows growth in power and control. Thus, most politicians and economists will ignore the long-term damage of Keynesianism in the early stage of a bubble when there is the illusion of prosperity, suggesting that the basic laws of economics had been repealed.”

Hardly does any of these fanatics have ever explained why throughout the centuries, experiments with paper money has ALWAYS failed.

Of course if one believes redistribution is a way or a path to prosperity, then apparently they are merely deluding themselves.

As Henry Hazlitt once wrote,

Any attempt to equalize wealth or income by forced redistribution must only tend to destroy wealth and income. Historically the best the would-be equalizers have ever succeeded in doing is to equalize downward. This has even been caustically described as their intention.

The collectivists amuse us with their logical fallacies, incoherent theories, misleading definitions, short term nostrums, and misinterpretation and deliberate twisting of facts.

For them it’s not about being right, but about blind faith.

Beware of false prophets.

More Taxes Equals More Revenues?

More Taxes Equals More Revenues?

Not so fast.

The fundamental law of economics are always at work to defy conventional wisdom.

Here is a great example.

From Reuters, (bold highlights mine)

Cash-strapped Bulgaria and Romania hoped taxing cigarettes would be an easy way to raise money but the hikes are driving smokers to a growing black market instead.

Criminal gangs and impoverished Roma communities near borders with countries where prices are lower -- Serbia, Macedonia, Moldova and Ukraine -- have taken to smuggling which has wiped out gains from higher excise duties.

Bulgaria increased taxes by nearly half this year and stepped up customs controls and police checks at shops and markets. Customs office data, however, shows tax revenues from cigarette sales so far in 2010 have fallen by nearly a third.

"The government created something unique. We actually now have a whole industry that provides for a big group of people," said Tihomir Bezlov of anti-corruption think-tank Center for the Study of Democracy.

Cato’s Dan Mitchell calls this the wonkish Laffer Curve at work.

But I like Professor Mark Perry’s simple quote, “If you tax something, you get less of it”

The higher the taxes, the likelihood of a larger informal economy, smuggling, corruption and inefficient allocation of resources as shown above.

Even the IMF has pointed this out as we have shown in an earlier post

Signs of Bond Bubble: Clashing Price Dynamics of US State CDS And The Treasury Market

Here is an example of the market’s current cognitive dissonance.

In the US, as many as 5 states appear to be having serious credit problems and are presently being reflected on the Credit Default Swaps (CDS) or the cost to insure a bond.

One might say that they are the US equivalent to Europe’s version of the PIIGS. We made an earlier similar observation here.

clip_image002

According to Bespoke Invest (chart also from them),

The number next to each state represents the cost per year to insure $10,000 worth of state bonds for 5 years. The higher the price, the higher the default risk. As shown, Illinois has the highest default risk of all states at 303.2 bps -- even higher than California. California ranks 2nd, followed by Michigan, New York, and New Jersey. Not to anyone's surprise, these are basically the five states in the country with the biggest fiscal problems at the moment. States that appear to be in pretty good shape include Texas, Virginia, Maryland, and Delaware.

clip_image004

As you can see the credit problems are NOT being reflected on US treasury yields (10 year TNX), which seem to ignore the developments in the CDS markets.

In contrast, the Eurozone recently had a fit of convulsion over the Greece-led PIIGs episode.

And instead, the US sovereign papers are seen “safety” assets where an ongoing onrush appears to be taking place as the mainstream hollers about “deflation (!)”.

In short, you have two markets seemingly headed for a collision course. This means one of them is decisively wrong.

For me, this represents part of the massive distortions engendered by interventionism. And vastly skewed prices have been misleading investors (led by the retail-dumb money). The treasury markets increasingly look like a time bomb, in the perspective of a ‘bond bubble’, set to implode.

The other way to say it is that if those credit woes exacerbate, then eventually, they will be vented on the treasury markets.

Caveat emptor.