Monday, December 16, 2019

After BSP’s RRR and Policy Cuts: Savings Deflation in October, Cash Reserves Tumble as Foreign Deposits and Bank Lending Rate Falls to Multi-year Low!


Friends, for alternative viewing pls. download the attached word document   ðŸ˜‰  

Credit-driven boom-bust cycles are temporally asymmetrical. The buildup is slow and long, the collapse quick and sudden. In Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises, one of the protagonists asks his friend: “How did you go bankrupt?” “Two ways,” went the answer, “gradually, then suddenly.” --Axel Leijonhufvud

In this issue

After BSP’s RRR and Policy Cuts: Savings Deflation in October, Cash Reserves Tumble as Foreign Deposits and Bank Lending Rate Falls to Multi-year Low!
-The Low Interest Rate Elixir Myth
-The Banking System’s Multi-year Credit Expansion Slowdown: Both a Demand and Supply Problem; First-Ever Savings Deposits Deflation!
-After 200 bps of RRR Cuts, Cash Reserves Shrunk Anew, Forex Deposits Growth Nears Deflation!
-The Low Interest Rate Induced Paradigm Shift of the Banking System’s Business Model, Bank Asset Growth at Multi-Year Lows
-As Loans Stagnate, Investment Returns May Have Peaked
-Bonds Remain as The Primary Source of Bank Financing
-Conclusion: The ‘Shock and Awe’ Crisis Resolution Template

After BSP’s RRR and Policy Cuts: Savings Deflation in October, Cash Reserves Tumble as Foreign Deposits and Bank Lending Rate Falls to Multi-year Low!

The Low Interest Rate Elixir Myth

After declaring the end of the policy easing streak in early November, then changing its tune to consider a rate cut by the yearend depending on November’s inflation data, the BSP kept its policy rates (ON RRP) for the year last week. The BSP Governor has floated a fifty point rate cut in 2020 instead.

We’ve been told that "the quick to jump aboard the easing train and have a willingness to ease further" would "augur well to economic growth". If this assumption is true, then what's stopping the BSP from announcing ZERO policy rates, if not NEGATIVE interest rates, NOW????

Figure 1

With policy rates close to RECORD lows, why has the National Government’s GDP been declining with it?  (figure 1, upmost pane) Interest Rate in the Philippines averaged 7.79 percent from 1985 until 2019, according to Tradingeconomics.com, reaching an all-time high of 31 percent in January of 1985 and a record low of 3 percent in June of 2016. (figure 1, middle pane)

Current policy rates have almost been half this average, and just 33% up at 4% from the 3% milepost low in June 2016.

And here’s a striking development: the cumulative 75 bps cuts in the BSP’s ON RRPs in May, August and September has failed to arrest the free-falling growth rate of the banking system’s loan portfolio in October! The banking system’s NET Total Loan Portfolio or TLP (inclusive of Interbank Loans and Repos) grew by 7.33% in October, sharply lower than 8.91% in September. Rates of such level had been seen last in 2009 to 2010! Following a spike that set an apogee in May 2018, October’s declining growth rate only reinforced the 17-month downtrend.

From a broader perspective, the banking system’s total loan portfolio growth rate has been plummeting even when the BSP’s policy rates are way below the 34- year average, and has been drifting near the June 2016 lows of 3%! (figure 1, lowest pane)

Although rates cuts from 2009 to 2013 did incite a growth spurt in the banking system’s loan portfolio, this growth paradigm has barely recurred since. Or, along with the launching of the QE in late 2015, the rate cuts of 2016 barely ignited a similar TLP growth spark. The combined easing measures only generated TLP growth rates that fluttered within a range, except for the May 2018 spike.

The 64-trillion peso question is WHY?

If such constitutes the baseline trend, HOW then and WHY will further “rate cuts” spur growth in the real economy? Despite BSP rates at historic lows in 2016, WHY did the TLP growth rates hit a plateau in 2016 to 2018? And WHY the floundering growth since? Or, WHY have banks been shy of expanding loans, at rates similar to 2009 to 2013, even when BSP policy rates during this period had generally been higher relative to the present (from 2016 to today)?

Most importantly, WHY have the banking system become increasingly LESS responsive to the BSP’s policies (QE, interest rates, and RRR cuts)?

The Banking System’s Multi-year Credit Expansion Slowdown: Both a Demand and Supply Problem; First-Ever Savings Deposits Deflation!

Figure 2

We also read that the BSP has purportedly been running a victory lap in claiming “Mission Accomplished” in its campaign against inflation. From the Inquirer (December 12, 2019): “The central bank on Thursday declared victory in its war against inflation — which it had been waging for two years now — saying prices of consumer goods and services for next year and beyond will likely be “benign.””

Yet, the most important force responsible for containing, both statistical and real economy inflation, has been the ongoing liquidity strains in the financial system. (figure 2 upmost window)

That’s aside from the National Government’s record amounts of cash stash, the panic imports in response to the 2018 rice crisis that led to a supply glut which depressed the food CPI; the most substantial component of the headline CPI, 2019's global bond boom, and the statistical juggling by official statisticians.

If policies have increasingly become ineffective in influencing the banking system’s loan portfolio, then how did the BSP slay the inflation monster, when the CPI has been shaped critically by money supply conditions, which are derivative from the rate of banking credit expansion?

Another remarkable development, experts believe in free lunches! They seem to forget that bank loans require funding! From the BSP-led FSCC’s Financial Stability Report (p.15): “The rising LDR suggests that the maturity mismatch is likewise increasing. Funds sourced by banks are largely savings deposits which are then used to fund longer-term credits.” (bold original, bold italics mine)

The banking system has officially announced through the BSP that savings deposits have entered the deflationary zone. Despite the 200 bps RRR and 75 bps ON RRP cuts, savings deposits CONTRACTED by .54% in October, the first-ever since at least 2008! October’s deflation validates the BSP’s M2’s savings deposits shrinkages in August and September and reinforces 1Q’s inverted yield curve.

Has it been so difficult to see and comprehend that the decaying rate of bank expansion accounts for a demand and supply juncture for the banking system?

On the supply side, the declining trend in the rate of change of savings deposits translates to the decreased funding for bank credit expansion? (figure 2, middle window)

On the demand side, the diminishing need for bank credit have been ventilated in the treasury and fixed income markets. (figure 2, lowest pane) Or, people would rather acquire fixed income securities than borrow to spend in the economy!

Of course, distortions brought about NG’s cash hoarding, the historic deficit spending, the fidgeting with the CPI, as well as, the BSP’s 200 bps RRR adjustments in November and December and the 25 bps policy cut in November have yet to reveal its intertemporal effects on the banking system’s balance sheet.

Without understanding the mechanics behind the WHY in the shortfall of bank credit demand, and the WHY in the downtrend of bank credit funding or supply through savings deposits, how can further easing or rate cuts “boost” the economy?

By magic? Or have these been intended to delude the public with a constant barrage of propaganda?

After 200 bps of RRR Cuts, Cash Reserves Shrunk Anew, Forex Deposits Growth Nears Deflation!

Or how about the perspective that years of artificially depressed interest rates are the PRIMARY CAUSE of banking’s problems?

Aside from the watershed downfall in bank credit expansion and savings deposit deflation, other symptoms have emerged elsewhere.

In spite of the estimated Php 200 billion funds released from the 200 bps RRR cuts from May to July, and again, the 75 bps ON RRP cuts, the banking system’s cash and due banks reserves resumed its downside pressures anew last October!
Figure 3

The banking system’s Cash and due banks contracted by .45% or Php 10.923 billion YoY and shrunk by Php 90.27 billion Month-on-Month. (figure 3, upmost pane)

From the BSP’s liquidity KPI, declining cash and deposits pushed the Cash to Deposits ratio to slip anew to 18.56%, the second-lowest level after June 2019’s 18.34%.  Importantly, the Liquid Assets to Deposits ratio weakened anew to 47.58% in October from 48.28% in September. (figure 3, middle window) The bank’s booming treasury assets have started to lose ground relative to changes in deposits.

The cheapest and most fundamental source of funding for bank lending, total deposit growth dropped to 5.5% the second-lowest this year after August 5.4%, and a level last reached in September 2012.

The 11.58% increase in demand deposits, which corroborated the M2 data for the period, as well as, time deposits which surged 16.13% partially offset the deflation in savings deposits. As such, total peso deposits growth fell to 6.47% in October from 6.57% a month ago.  Again, this rate of growth resonates with 2012. Savings deposits accounted for 44.6% share of peso deposit liabilities while demand and time deposits accounted for 28.7% and 24.7%.

Aside from peso savings, another worrisome aspect would be foreign deposits. While the BSP crows about its Gross International Reserves, the banking system’s total foreign deposit liabilities have trended towards deflation. That’s because of the sharp 6.7% contraction or deflation in demand deposits, and the crawling growth of savings and time deposits, which clocked in at 2% and .15%. (figure 3, lowest pane)

Aside from swelling credit transactions with US banks, has the BSP been puffing up its reserves by absorbing the banking system’s foreign deposit liabilities?

Put differently, the erosion of the Php 200 billion freed by the BSP through reserve requirements to the banking system had been swift. Not only is the banking system being plagued by cascading cash reserves, but the rapidly corroding deposit base has been contributing immensely to the shortfall in bank credit expansion.

The Low Interest Rate Induced Paradigm Shift of the Banking System’s Business Model, Bank Asset Growth at Multi-Year Lows

To shield the Philippines from the Great Recession, aside from the fiscal stimulus worth Php 330 billion, or 4.1% of the GDP, called the Economic Resiliency Plan (ADB Doraisami 2011 p.30), the BSP went into a rate-cutting spree. The series of cuts impelled a structural transformation of the banking system’s model, which leaned towards bank credit expansion to boost its asset base. At the close of 2008, the BSP’s policy rate was 5.5%.

In June 2009, the % share of the banking system’s total loan portfolio was at 49.04%, while total investments recorded at 27.74%. As of October 2019, the proportions shifted to 58.67% and 23.5%. Total bank assets almost tripled to Php 17.25 trillion in June 2019 from Php 5.78 trillion in June 2009 for a CAGR of 11.56%. So not only did the bank assets grew briskly, but the gist of its growth emanated from bank credit expansion! (figure 4, upmost pane)
Figure 4

With the banking system’s deepening its reliance on loans for its income and asset growth, and with bank borrowers chasing faddish investments made profitable by the façade of artificially low interest rates, the BSP tightening of 2014, which slowed economic growth began to affect the credit quality.

So even as QE was launched in late 2015, which had been supported by the adjustment to a record low BSP policy rates in June 2016, banks begun to admit by publishing increases in credit impairments.   

Again despite 200 bps RRR cuts in 2018, and another 200 bps reduction in May to July of 2019, October Net Non-Performing Loans at 1.15% are knocking at the door of August 2019’s 1.18%, a multi-year high. (figure 4, middle window)

And these are the published ones, how about the undeclared impairments?

And as loans, cash and deposits simultaneously stumble, growth in the banking system’s total asset have slowed to 7.72% in October, marking a 7-year low rate! (figure 4, lowest window)

As Loans Stagnate, Investment Returns May Have Peaked
Figure 5

And if banks’ core operations have barely been vibrant, what’s elevating their asset base? The short answer: speculation on financial assets. Banks have been piling on Available for Sale (AFS) and Held for Trading (HFT) financial assets. AFS, with a 29.7% share of gross financial assets, jumped 50.5% in October, while HFT, with a 6.6% share, increased 28.9%. Growth of Held to Maturity assets, with 63.6% share, the accounting sanctuary from losses, moderated to 3.04%. (figure 5, upmost window)

Interestingly, as banks chase returns from the treasury boom, growth of net investments have begun to subside. Net Investments recorded a 15.13% increase in October down from 15.6% a month ago and from April’s peak at 20%. (figure 5, middle window)

And even as the investment category’s accumulated market gains soared by 211% YoY, in nominal or peso terms, this has begun to moderate. October’s gains recorded at Php 22.016 billion was down from 23.968 billion a month ago and from the recent high of Php 30.75 in August. (figure 5, lowest pane)

If widening treasury spreads helped produce recent profits, would a likely narrowing undermine them? Well, the trend of 10-and 1-year spread has been southbound since 2011, and so has the nominal or peso accumulated gains since 2013.

If lending operations continue to stagnate while investments lose its luster, wouldn’t that be a toxic mix for the banking system’s profits and liquidity?

Maybe the last batch of 200 bps in RRR cuts may do the trick?

Bonds Remain as The Primary Source of Bank Financing
  
Figure 6

With deposits under pressure, this leaves the capital markets as the primary funding source for banks.

Bills payable growth YoY materially slowed to 6.83% in October from 33.98%. On a month-on-month basis, bills payable decreased by Php 129.2 billion to Php 789.9 billion from Php 919.06 billion. However, bonds payable YoY rocketed by 149.12% from 143.16% a month ago. On an m-o-m basis, bonds payable expanded by Php 7.7 billion to Php 525.6 billion from Php 517.9 billion.

As a % share of the total, bond liabilities expanded to 3.45% in October from 3.36%.  Meanwhile, bill payable decreased to 5.16% from 5.96% a month ago. (figure 6, upper and middle pane)

These imply that aside from steep competition with the government for access to the public’s funds, banks continue to tap higher-cost financing to fund its operations. Yet, higher-cost would translate to narrower interest margins that again would put pressure on banks. It’s a feedback loop of potential errors and risks.

Interestingly, while the growth rate of deposit liabilities have been decelerating substantially, its share of the total increased to 86.25% from 85.09%, which extrapolates to lackluster growth in the other categories.

The most interesting part has been the non-conversion to loans of the growth outperformance of peso demand deposit liabilities in September and October in both the bank’s report card to the BSP and the M2 accounts. What's the reason for this and why? Will loan growth surprise with a spike? (figure 6, lowest window)

Conclusion: The ‘Shock and Awe’ Crisis Resolution Template

From the Keynesian perspective embraced by the mainstream, everything is about aggregate demand. Thus, we’ve been told that cutting of interest rates or monetary easing, which should boost bank lending, and thus spending, would mechanically produce G-R-O-W-T-H.

Such heuristic masquerading as economics fails to account for significant correlations that establish the causal and transmission linkages of monetary policies to the economy through the banking system, the main source of the money supply.

And such fall short of explaining how the recent multi-year low rate of bank credit expansion has signified both a product of demand and supply.

For instance, subdued yields account for the liquidity preference of individuals to own fixed income securities than engage in investments through bank credit expansion.

On the other hand, dwindling savings deposits, the primary source of funding for bank credit expansion, implies reduced supply for lending.

And the near record low rates don’t elucidate the declining long-term GDP trend, the liquidity squeeze, tumbling deposits liabilities, which are at multi-year lows, alongside bank lending growth rates.

Despite the 200 bps RRR cuts and 75 bps policy rate cuts, cash reserves of the banking system fumbled anew as Net Non-Performing Loans rose to challenge the recent highs. It’s a sign that the BSP’s implicit bailout has become ineffectual.

Aside from savings deflation, another troublesome development has been the sharp deterioration of FX deposits, which had been weak in all categories, particularly the steep deflation in demand deposits.

The suppressed interest rate regime, which earlier boosted lending and the GDP, has met the law of diminishing returns. Importantly, since the banks' business model has shifted most of its weight towards lending, the industry became vulnerable to manifold risks, including interest, currency, inflation, market, and the economy.

As policy imposed low rates gave rise to projects that wouldn’t have existed without such subsidies, such in turn gave rise to credit impairments. Recent economic infirmities supported by the latest rate increases have magnified Net NPLs, which accelerated the liquidity strains in the financial system.

Recently, fixed income assets have boosted bank profits and assets. But factors that had brought about such bonanza indicate a turnaround.

If bank lending fails to pick up, and if bank investment falters, then the liquidity squeeze would amplify.

The BSP now prays that the next 200 bps RRR cuts plus the deposit substitute tweak would do the trick.

Moreover, banks have competed with the government for access to the public’s savings through the capital markets, which raises the cost of its lending operations. The rising cost of borrowing would reduce interest margins, compounding on pressures for banks to generate liquidity and profits.

As a final note, to the crises the incumbent administration faces, it uses a “shock and awe” template.

For instance, to subdue the rice crisis of 2018, a shift to a tariff system from the quota system was used. Because of the water crisis of 2019, the NG arbitrarily suspended the so-called onerous contracts with its existing concessionaires.

To help address the inflation scare of 2018, the BSP raised rates sharply and rapidly in seeming panic. Now it has gradually been trying to reverse this. And to address the liquidity strains, the BSP has been cutting RRR rates aggressively.

Shock and awe.

The measures undertaken as resolution towards such challenges are perceived and acted from a very short-term perspective, whereby unintended consequences from such drastic actions would surely surface over time.

And as one intervention begets another intervention, such leads to the general suffocation of economic and civil freedoms, and consequently, lower standards of living.


Sunday, December 15, 2019

Neo-Socialism Goes Full Throttle: The Raging War on Water Concessionaires and ABS-CBN, Is Dito Telecommunity the Agenda?



Government central planning leaves little or no autonomy or private arenas for alternative choices for the individuals of a socialist society. The government is the monopoly allocator of resources and producer of goods. It is the single employer for all those looking for work. It is the controller of all means and methods of communication and exchange of ideas. It requires the goals and purposes of the individual to be made subservient to those in “the plan,” and coercively if needed. Nor can new democratic choices be allowed to constantly challenge and change the coherence and implementation of “the plan” without causing societal instability—Richard M Ebeling

In this issue

Neo-Socialism Goes Full Throttle: The Raging War on Water Concessionaires and ABS-CBN, Is Dito Telecommunity the Agenda?
-The Escalation of Neo-Socialism: President Threatens Nationalization of Water Concessionaires, Closure of ABS!
-The PSE Wakes Up to the Smell of Neo-Socialism
-Is the Agenda Behind the War on Water Concessionaires and ABS Been About Dito Telecommunity?

Neo-Socialism Goes Full Throttle: The Raging War on Water Concessionaires and ABS-CBN, Is Dito Telecommunity the Agenda?

The Escalation of Neo-Socialism: President Threatens Nationalization of Water Concessionaires, Closure of ABS!

At its onset (May 2016), I warned about the impact on the economy from the socialist direction of this administration*.

the government will likely decrease participation of private sector in the economy through legislation. The government will likely resort to the substitution of private sector participation through nationalizations. Or that the government will increase regulations and mandates that will raise barriers to entry. So by picking on winners, the incoming administration may essentially endow the privilege of political protection from competition to select favored (rent seeking/crony) private entities or to state owned enterprises.


Recent events have only been magnifying this pathway.

Nota Bene: The latest events will be depicted from the mainstream’s viewpoint, ergo the excerpts from the news. Bold highlights are mine.

First, the political leadership’s crescendoing intimidation of ABS-CBN.

From the Inquirer (December 4, 2019): “President Rodrigo Duterte on Tuesday vowed that “he will see to it” that the franchise of broadcast giant ABS-CBN would not be renewed…“Your franchise will end next year. If you are expecting that it will be renewed, I’m sorry. You’re out. I will see to it that you’re out,” he said, addressing ABS-CBN…Republic Act No. 3846 requires radio and television broadcasters in the Philippines to obtain a franchise from Congress. It was the first time that the President had stated that he would personally ensure that the network’s franchise would not be renewed. ABS-CBN’s 25-year franchise expires on March 30, 2020.”

If upheld, will the National Government foreclose and nationalize, or will it commandeer ABS-CBN to a new administration friendly owner? The cessation of ABS is a doubtful option.

Next, the administration’s threat to nationalize water concessionaires.

From the Inquirer (December 10, 2019): “President Rodrigo Duterte on Tuesday threatened to take over privately-owned Maynilad Water Services, Inc. and Manila Water Company, Inc. for what he called the “onerous” 1997 water concession agreements they entered into with the government. Duterte said he would want to talk to officials of the water concessionaires as well as the government lawyers involved in the drafting of the contracts. “I will expropriate everything. I will seize everything. File charges until you want. Anyway, I will be out in two years,” Duterte said in a speech during the oathtaking of newly-appointed government officials in Malacañang. In separate decisions, the Singapore-based Permanent Court of Arbitration ordered the Philippine government in 2017 to pay P3.6 billion to Maynilad and in November to compensate P7 billion to Manila Water for losses suffered by the water firms due to disallowed water rate increases from 2013 to 2017.”

The President followed this up, threatening a takeover by the military.

To mollify a fuming President, not only have these concessionaires announced the deferral of rate hikes, they declared the suspension of the compensation awarded them by an international arbitration court.

From the Inquirer (December 11, 2019): “Facing threats of imprisonment, charges of economic sabotage and even expropriation from President Rodrigo Duterte, officials of the country’s two biggest water concessionaires have finally backed down…On Tuesday, they said they would no longer seek to collect from the government close to P11 billion that an international arbitration court had awarded to them for foregone revenue from higher rates that they were unable to implement.”

Beaten into submission, the elite private sector owners also acceded to renegotiate the so-called onerous contracts.

From the Inquirer (December 13, 2019): “Water concessionaires Maynilad and Manila water agreed to renegotiate the “onerous” 1997 water agreement with the government. In separate letters to the President Rodrigo Duterte on December 10, Maynilad Chair Manny Pangilinan and Manila Water Chairman Fernando Zobel de Ayala, the two water concessionaires agreed for a renegotiation of their water deals with the government. Pangilinan assured Duterte of “its willingness” to cooperate with the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) ‘to have certain provisions of the Concession Agreement reviewed and amended.” He reaffirmed Maynilad’s “unwavering commitment” in nation-building, economic growth and stability of service to the people.”

To top it all, one of the water firms even issued a public apology!

Helplessly faced against a politically mandated coercive force who could subvert their investments, why not then?

From the Inquirer (December 12, 2019): Manila Water has apologized for upsetting President Rodrigo Duterte after an international tribunal ruled in favor of the country’s two water concessionaires. Manila Water president Jose Rene Almendras explained that the case was filed as early as 2015 but the ruling by the Singapore-based Permanent Court of Arbitration was only made earlier under the Duterte administration…It’s unfortunate the President got mad. We didn’t mean to give the President any problem. We don’t want to fight President Rodrigo Duterte because he is doing what is good for the people. We support him…We apologize if the arbitral ruling angered him. That’s why we waived the arbitral ruling because the President does not want it. We understand, that’s why we decided not that we will not push for it.”

Despite the proffered conciliatory actions, the unconvinced leadership initiated legal proceedings against them!

From the Inquirer (December 11, 2019): The Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) has revoked the extension of concession agreements of both Maynilad Water Services Inc. and Manila Water Company Inc.,  the two firms distribute water in Metro Manila and adjacent provinces. The extension of the concession agreements until 2037 was approved by the MWSS in a board resolution in 2009. Due to the revocation, however, the water firms’ concession will end in 2022.

Rooted from the fundamental socialist precept that the interest of the collective reigns supreme, the administration's unilateral coercive actions represent a flagrant violation of the sanctity of contracts, undermining the basic property rights of the citizenry.

Do you know that we have a Bill of Rights? According to Article III of the 1987 Constitution’s Bill of Rights: “Section 1. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”

Why would investments flow into the economy, if such rights can’t be secured, and or, if rules, regulations and contracts of voluntary exchanges are subject to the whims and caprices of the leadership? 

And it doesn’t stop here.

Meanwhile, the media has floated a possible replacement to the incumbent concessionaires. The candidate: a firm owned by a staunch political ally!

From the Inquirer (December 10, 2019): “President Rodrigo Duterte’s endorsement of the Villars’ water utility firm PrimeWater Infrastructure Corp. could be because it came from Manny Villar’s hard work, Senator Cynthia Villar said Tuesday. The senator pointed out her husband did not inherit the business, unlike water concessionaires Manila Water and Maynilad…Duterte earlier lauded the Villars, and hinted their possible takeover of the capital region’s water supply system.”

So would a deal with the Villar group comprise “good for the people” than the existing suppliers?

Could a takeover of the water franchise have signified the administration's quid pro quo to the Villar group for pulling out of the race for the 3rd telco, at the close of 2018, paving the way for the China Telecom-Dennis Uy franchise?

However, concerned over a possible backlash, naturally, the representative of the politically favored firm and the Palace issued their respective public denials.

From MSN/GMA (December 11, 2019): “Senator Cynthia Villar on Tuesday denied that President Rodrigo Duterte is building up her family to take over the job of supplying water to Metro Manila from two water concessionaires…However, asked if her family's PrimeWater Infrastructure Corporation will vie for a concession agreement with the government once the present concessionaires' contracts expire, Villar said she does not know.”

From the MSN/Philstar (December 13, 2019): President Duterte’s pressuring the country’s top water distributors is meant to protect the interests of the people and not to pave the way for a takeover of the firms by his friends, administration officials said yesterday. “Oh no, definitely not,” Presidential Communications Secretary Martin Andanar said when asked in an interview on ANC about speculation that Duterte wanted to replace the “oligarchs” – the President’s description of the owners of the two water concessionaires – “with his own oligarch.”

So which is which, nationalization or expropriation in favor of an ally?

And haven't these been sufficient evidence of the imposition of rigid central planning and the tightening control by the administration on the most salient political-economic sectors of the nation?

Notwithstanding the record deficits, the net increase in taxes, surging bureaucracy and regulations, and other forms of socio-political-economic interventions, how could such blatant violation of property rights be supposedly representative of a ‘business-friendly’ administration?

Or, “friendly” applies to whose business interests?? The Xi-sponsored mainland Chinese enterprises, the Dennis Uy firms, the Villar business empire, and more??

Fundamentally, rent-seeking or crony relationships represent the political allocation of economic resources, which are prone to the accretion of imbalances.

As I wrote back in March of this year**,

Privatizing profits and socializing losses has been the implicit principle guiding the political framework behind such private water concessions. These are rent-seeking firms or private firms that benefit from political privileges (in this case monopoly concessions).

The National Government (NG) subcontracted or transferred to private sector agents the operation of such utilities to free the former from financial constraints in exchange for regulated profits of the latter through price controls.


Why should a new “for the people” contract be any different?

As demonstrated, all it takes is a foreseen event, such as the 2019 water crisis, to expose the siloed misallocation of resources.

The PSE Wakes Up to the Smell of Neo-Socialism

Interestingly, though mainstream media has diverted the blame and the impact from the heightening risks of nationalization elsewhere, or the escalating odds of the overhaul of the ownership of water concessionaires favoring the political allies, such imperious interventions have spurred an investor revulsion prompting a harrowing weekly plunge in the prices of stocks related to the controversy.
 
Even after a sharp Friday bounce, Maynilad’s owners DMC and Metro Pacific hemorrhaged 8.26% and 17.8%, respectively, while Ayala Corp shed 5.6% as subsidiary Manila Water crashed 38.5%. ABS-CBN fell 5%. Please note that Ayala Corp, Metro Pacific, and DMC are component members of the PSEi and that cascading prices are a demonstration of the sharp deterioration of the health of the broader markets.
  
This week’s plunge signified an acceleration of the weakening prices of all five issues since 2017-8 or before the outbreak of the 2019 water crisis. ABS has been in a freefall since the aftermath of 2016 Presidential election.

Recent political interventions had only exacerbated the attenuation of prices caused by the dissipation of financial liquidity.

Looking at those charts may draw the impression that the headline could be below the 7,000 levels. But this has not been the case.

Despite such turmoil, the headline index soared .97% this week on SM Prime (+2.45%), Ayala Land (+3.08%), Banco De Oro (+2.3%), and JG Summit (+3.8%) carried the weight of Friday’s steep 1.76% advance.

As a reminder, % changes are not the same for component members of the index. That's because the free float weights of these firms ultimately determine the scale of contribution to the index.
 
Hence, this week’s performance entrenches further the trend of the SY group’s record dominance of the headline index. The result of such index manipulation has been to skew the distribution of the PER towards these (and some of the published eps are inflated).

Imbalances have been growing everywhere!

The good thing is, the PSE has partly awakened to the fact that neo-socialism and the capital markets or the market economy are disharmonious.

And despite the constant rigging, the markets ultimately clear!

More importantly, seeing the cluelessness of the mainstream/establishment experts about the underlying risks has just been incredible! From their ken, because economics is all about statistics, changes in governance structure have no bearing on it! Surprised at the gravity of the impact, they end up rationalizing the event and putting a glossy spin on the likely outcome from a ‘renegotiated’ deal. Good luck with that!

Oversold conditions may prompt for a bounce alright, but whether they are sustainable or not ultimately depends on the state of financial liquidity and the underlying political conditions driving perceptions, and consequently, actions expressed through prices.

Is the Agenda Behind the War on Water Concessionaires and ABS Been About Dito Telecommunity?

Despite the headlines, I propound a different angle from the unfolding controversy. If the plan is not to nationalize, then what could be the alternative agenda?

Let us start with a question. What is the common ground or denominator of listed firms Metro Pacific, Ayala Corp, and ABS-CBN? Answer: These firms are affiliated to, or have companies with existing telecom and media infrastructures, as well as substantial market shares.

In spite being awarded the third telco franchise, President Duterte’s gift to China’s President Xi, via China Telecoms through politically favorite businessman Dennis Uy, Dito Telecommunity (formerly Mislatel) would require massive amounts of money and time to roll-out infrastructure and facilities, as well as, obtain a critical market share to render their firm viable.  Though theoretically, as a Chinese state company, money shouldn’t be such a problem.

Last July, the firm pushed back its roll-out schedule to the 2Q of 2020, according to the CNN (July 9), “While commercial operations were initially targeted to begin as early as September this year, Dito spokesperson Adel Tamano said they have moved the target to the second quarter of 2020.”

And to accelerate this, it announced partnerships. According to the Inquirer (October 4), “DITO announced a partnership on Thursday with SkyCable Corp., owned by the Lopez family’s ABS-CBN Corp., and the group of politician Luis Chavit Singson, who last year launched a failed bid for the third telco slot.”

That’s because Dito has committed to the National Government several targets: “Under its commitments to the NTC, the company promised to cover at least 37 percent of the population on its first year—a period that would end on July 8, 2020. Over its five-year commitment period, it promised to cover 84 percent of the Philippines and offer internet speeds of at least 55 megabits per second.”

The company reportedly allotted over $6 billion for this.

Unless the constitution is amended to allow an extended tenure, or should martial law will be declared or both, the Duterte regime ends on 2022 or about two years from now.

What if the opposition snares the political helm from this regime?

What if the targets for infrastructure and market share won’t be fulfilled, wouldn’t Dito’s interests be in jeopardy?

As such, wouldn’t it be a more viable option to just buy-out a firm with existing facilities and markets? Wouldn’t PLDT and Globe become tantalizing and convenient targets for a cheap M&A that galvanizes Dito’s foothold in the telco market?

Despite its partnership with Skycable, wouldn’t ABS’s market share in television, cable, fiber, and radio systems provide the critical mass in reaching voters in the electoral campaign that may help the regime and their allies cement their stranglehold over the political system in 2022?

Given the evolving transition towards a neo-socialist political-economic system, wouldn’t these politically sensitive facilities provide both socio-economic and political benefits to the incumbent leadership to exercise surveillance and command of the population?

In the old school, socialism involved the state’s nationalization or taking control of the factors of production. In the alternative version, the fascist, crony, or state capitalist model, a semblance of private property is allowed but operates under the strict supervision of the state.

So why not take command of these facilities? How? By applying political pressure on its owners, through different fronts, that may compel its liquidation at fire-sale prices!

Hence, could the war on water concessionaires and ABS been about leveraging for an M&A in telecom and media?

Or why not have the government, if not its allies, control ALL, if not most of the critical utilities necessary to sustain the legacy of the Duterte’s regime?

From this perspective, the agenda behind the war on water concessionaires and ABS-CBN becomes clearer.

As I have been saying, because utilities are easier to nationalize or commandeer, please avoid them. As history shows, utilities have signified the most nationalized sector in the world!

Attachments area