I’ve just updated Current Market Tactics. If you’re on the blog, you can also reach the CMT page by clicking the tab at the top of the page.
Archive for the 'economics' Category
I’ve just updated Current Market Tactics
Published January 23, 2012 Constructing a Portfolio , Current Market Thoughts , economics , Portfolio management , Recent Market Action , Shaping a portfolio for 2012 , Strategy Leave a CommentTags: Current Market Tactics, economics, economy, finance, investing, investment performance, investment strategy, market tactics, money, Portfolio management, stock market
Shaping a portfolio for 2012 (IV): the US
Published January 8, 2012 Constructing a Portfolio , Current Market Thoughts , employment , Employment Situation report , Recent Market Action , Shaping a portfolio for 2012 , Strategy Leave a CommentTags: business, Current Market Tactics, economics, economy, finance, investing, investment strategy, money, Portfolio management, Shaping a portfolio for 2012, stock market
US: stocks vs. economy
It’s increasingly important in looking at the current US stock market, as it typically has been with almost every other national bourse, to distinguish between the health of the domestic economy and the prospects for the stocks listed there.
How so?
According to the best information from Standard & Poors (not every member of the S&P 500 chooses to break out revenues geographically), only 50% of the revenue generated by the 500 come from the US. About 25% are sourced from Europe and the rest from emerging markets.
In today’s US, as has been the case for the last generation elsewhere, one of the first questions an investor should ask is whether economic growth inside the country will be better or worse than growth abroad.
So let’s look at the US economy.
the economy
the Great Recession
The domestic housing bubble began to collapse of its own weight in mid-2007. The economy reached its nadir in mid-2009 and has been recovering since.
recovery
Three bumps in the road:
–the boost from spending deferred by companies and individuals during the down turn was exhausted in mid-2010 and the economy slowed somewhat.
–the Fukushima nuclear disaster disrupted industrial supply chains in March 2011. That’s basically over.
–worries about a financial implosion of the EU that could send negative ripples globally caused companies worldwide to shrink inventories, starting in the summer. That downward adjustment appears to have just ended.
Looking into 2012,
the economic situation in the US seems comparatively good:
–the housing market may finally be bottoming, in all but the areas worst affected by speculation, after almost five years of decline
–much of the excessive debt taken on by consumers during the bubble has been worked off during three years of restrained consumption
–employment is improving at a slow, but gradually increasing, rate
–real growth in the US will likely be around +3% for this year, which would make the country the best performer among the major developed economies.
Yes, the US faces longer-term problems: substantial government debt, continuing government budget deficits, increasing competition from China and other emerging countries, the decades-long failure of either major political party to develop a policy agenda relevant for contemporary America. There’s also the near-term question of fallout from potential economic/financial problems in Europe.
Still, relative to both its own experience over the past several years and prospects for the reset of the developed world. the US is looking pretty good.
the stock market
From a simple top-down perspective, I think market strategy is clear:
–there’s a clear case for overweighting the US vs. Europe or Japan.
One might also argue for overweighting the US vs the emerging world as well, since domestic earnings will likely be expanding at an accelerating rate while emerging markets’ profits, although growing faster, will be doing so at a decelerating rate–but I’m less confident that this is the right thing to do.
–one should emphasize domestic-oriented firms vs. international companies, especially those with exposure to the Eurozone
–manufacturers of industrial equipment and consumer durables should do relatively well
–expect consumers to continue the process, already begun, of trading back up to the higher-end brands they abandoned during the recession
–given that growth stock beneficiaries of structural change have been the biggest winners until the past few months, it’s possible that traditional business cycle-sensitive value stocks will have their day in the sun.
Nothing’s ever that easy, though.
The internet, as wielder of the sword of creative destruction, continues to wreak havoc among bricks-and-mortar retailers and the strip malls they inhabit.
The question of whether the current high unemployment rate is cyclical or structural (I’m in the structural camp) is also relevant. If you think high unemployment is cyclical–and that continuing economic growth mostly means the long-term unemployed gradually get their jobs back–buy WMT or DG. If you think it’s structural–and that growth mostly means the currently employed get raises–buy TIF or JWN. (Note: for the past six months, DG has been the clear winner, with WMT in second place. Is this a counter-trend rally or the start of a new trend? If the former, is it already mostly played out?)
Luckily, there’s no need for any investor to have a strong opinion about everything–or to act on everything he has an opinion about. Instead, the secret to success is to understand what the issues are, but to locate a small number of things that you have the highest degree of confidence in to invest in.
Shaping a portfolio for 2012 (III): China
Published January 6, 2012 China , economics , emerging markets , Foreign markets , Hong Kong , Portfolio management , Recent Market Action , Shaping a portfolio for 2012 , Strategy Leave a CommentTags: business, China, Current Market Tactics, economics, emerging markets, finance, investing, investment strategy, market tactics, money, Portfolio management, Shaping a portfolio for 2012, stock market
China
In assessing China, I think it’s important to distinguish carefully between the course of the mainland Chinese economy and the fortunes of China-related stocks.
the economy
background
The foremost goal of the Beijing government is to keep the ruling Communist Party in power. This translates into the economic objective of avoiding possible social unrest by keeping employment high and unemployment low. That’s quite a trick when you’re managing the transition from a rural, agriculture-based society to a more urban and manufacturing-oriented one.
In addition, China dedicated itself to creating a Western-style market-based economy in the late 1970s when it realized the country was too complex for central planning to work. Again, hard to do when three-quarters of your industrial base was zombie-like state-owned corporations, when being a businessman was a felony and where citizens preferred to bury chuk kam gold trinkets in the back yard rather than use banks.
Complicating the situation further is the fact that high corporate or local/national government officials are Party officials whose chances for personal promotion are directly related to aggressively growing the areas they control, whether doing so makes long-term economic sense or not.
results
At the same time, all the mid-level national economic officials I’ve met–who actually implement policy–have been highly sophisticated, well-trained (mostly from the US or UK), competent and dedicated to creating healthy and balanced growth.
Given the large size of the Chinese economy and the paucity of tools to make economic policy, the best they’ve been able to do is to lurch between two extremes, overheating and stalling (the latter meaning unemployment is rising–a combination of new entrants to the labor force and layoffs)–and gradually lessen the amplitude of the cyclical swings.
where we are now
When the developed world appeared to be coming apart at the seams in 2008, China allowed a particularly strong domestic lurch to the upside. For the past two years or so, Beijing has been trying to force an economic slowdown to rein in that expansionary impulse.
Policymakers have most recently been signalling their belief that slowdown has gone far enough and it’s time for faster expansion again.
China stocks
By and large, non-citizens can’t buy or sell stocks in the domestic market. I’m not sure it makes much economic difference whether the local bourses go up or down.
Hong Kong is the natural market where the best and brightest of the mainland list their shares.
Over the past six months, Hong Kong stocks have sold off much more heavily than, say, the S&P 500, in response to worries about the Eurozone and potential global economic slowdown. Since bottoming in early October, they’ve only rallied back in line with the S&P. As I see it, so far there’s no anticipation of a better mainland economy this year in Hong Kong stock prices. Many stocks there look cheap to me.
what to do
Personally, I think it’s important for all but the most risk-averse investors to have some exposure to the Chinese economy.
The most conservative way to do so is to hold companies listed in the US or Europe that have significant businesses in China. Luxury goods retailers like LVMH, Tiffany or Coach are possibilities. Casino companies like Wynn and Las Vegas Sands make all their money in Asia.
Discount brokers like Fidelity offer international trading services that allow foreigners to buy stocks in Hong Kong directly and cheaply. Most investors will likely find it easier not to do research themselves, however, and buy an ETF or an actively managed mutual fund that specializes in Hong Kong or Greater China.
Price action in December and early January is often hard to read because of tax-related selling–losers in December, winners in early January. Still, I’ve been a bit surprised that Hong Kong stocks haven’t done better than they have, given that the most recent economic news out of China, the EU and the US has virtually all been positive.
I don’t think this means that the positive case for the Chinese economy and for Hong Kong stocks is incorrect. It may just take more time for negative emotion–from investors located in Europe, I think–to exhaust itself. I’ve always thought that “buy on weakness” is pretty lame advice. But it’s probably the right approach in this case.
importance of the cash flow statement: it’s like mushrooms
Published December 29, 2011 Accounting , cash flow , economics Leave a CommentTags: Accounting, business, cash flow statement, economics, finance, investing, money, stock market
why project a cash flow statement?
While I was in graduate school, I spent a year in Germany studying at Eberhard Karls University in Tübingen. Before school started I lived for a while with a German family. Every Saturday morning we would roam the local woods in search of the mushrooms that would comprise one or two of our meals during the following week. Since I had no clue what I was doing, my hosts would scrutinize any mushrooms I found very carefully to make sure they weren’t poisonous.
One type, the death cap–which I never stumbled across–still stands vividly in my mind. According to my family and to public service announcements on tv, not only was this mushroom deadly, but the first symptoms of its effects only developed after the poisoning was too far advanced to be treated.
There’s an analog to this situation in the investment world. These are cases where the financial results of past management actions narrow the scope of future possible outcomes to the point where one or two become highly probable–if not unavoidable. In these cases, management is never going to spell out the constraints it it working under. Nevertheless, the current financial condition probably makes their future actions very highly predictable.
Projecting a cash flow statement for such a company is the way to uncover and evaluate. (An analyst should do this for every company under coverage. In my experience, most don’t. In “mushroom” cases, however, the cash flow statement is crucial.)
examples
a toy company
In the early Nineties I was following–and for a while owned shares in–a small publicly owned toy company. It earned, say, $10 million annually. One year it had a surprisingly successful spring-driven flying toy doll for girls. The following year it decided to make a similar toy for boys, with a martial theme and a stronger spring. As I recall, the firm decided to spend $40 million on materials and labor for this toy (a real roll of the dice at 4x total corporate earnings). It got the money through trade financing and borrowing from its bank. The risk was especially high, since all the manufacturing had to be done at one time, in preparation for the yearend holiday selling season. On the other hand, the prior year’s toy had been a smash hit; the firm really understood the boy market and felt this one would be, as well.
Soon after the toy was on the shelves of toy stores, the company began to get reports that the combination of a strong spring and curious young boys was resulting in severe eye injuries to users. The government mandated a recall. The $20 million in profits the company had envisioned was up in smoke. The inventory that had cost $40 million to make was now worth close to zero.
Do the math. At most $10 million in earnings from other toys vs. $40 million in short-term financing needing to be repaid = no way out.
the Mets
The New York Times published a recent article on the Mets’ finances, titled “For Mets, Vast Debt and Not a Lot of Time.” There isn’t enough publicly available information to draw a firm conclusion, but if the figures in the article are correct, the Mets don’t have much wiggle room. The current club drive to lower the total player salary bill may be the only real option it has. Specifically,
Sources of funds:
The Mets lost $70 million (I’m presuming that this is a pre-tax figure, but this isn’t clear) last season, with a player payroll of about $150 million. Let’s say the actual pre-tax cash outflow was $30 million.
If we make the (optimistic) assumption that ticket sales and concession revenue in 2012 is constant with 2011, then lowering payroll to $100 million will result in a pre-tax loss of $20 million for 2012. Cash flow should be positive, at about $20 million.
2013 cash inflow = $40 million ?
2014 cash inflow = $50 million ?
Uses of funds:
repayment of $25 million to Major League Baseball, now overdue
repayment of $40 million Bank of America bridge loan
repayment of $430 million team loan in 2014.
If, again, the NYT figures are correct and the cash inflow numbers I’ve made up for 2012-14 are anywhere close, the Mets won’t be able to make much of a dent in the 2014 principal repayment requirement. It seems to me that dealing with the $430 million that comes due in three years is the major management issue.
What I’ve written above is just the bare bones. The Mets are attempting to find outside investors who are willing to accept having no say in the running of the organization. Suit by the Madoff trustee is pending. And, of course, there’s the tangled relationship between the Mets and SNY, the Wilpon-controlled cable network to which the club has sold broadcast rights.
others
Eastman Kodak has been supporting its ongoing turnaround through outside financing and asset sales. Looking at the cash flow statement for the past couple of years and projecting it forward for the next few will be highly instructive.
Current market worries about Italy’s sovereign debt also have a cash flow basis. The issue is the current high cost of refinancing maturing debt. Unlike the previous corporate instances, Italy’s new government has much greater scope for initiating reforms that can change market perceptions quickly. And perceptions, rather than the amount of outstanding debt (which is typically the corporate issue), are the main concern here. Still, projecting sources and uses of funds forward for several years will give a much clearer grasp on the issues than simply watching current yields.
a final note on the Olympus scandal
Published December 26, 2011 Current Market Thoughts , Japanese development , Stock ideas , tobashi Leave a CommentTags: Accounting, business, company news, finance, investing, Japan, Olympus, Olympus scandal, Portfolio management, stock market, tobashi
a recap
During the summer, the newly appointed CEO of Olympus, Michael Woodford, followed up on an account in a Japanese magazine of severe financial irregularities at Olympus (TYO: 7733). He discovered a number of failed M&A transactions involving gigantic payments to obscure companies that disappeared from existence soon after receiving the money.
He was fired for his pains. He promptly left Japan, saying he feared for his personal safety. Once in the UK, he disclosed everything to the world financial press.
An independent panel was appointed by the Olympus board of directors to investigate the situation. The panel determined that Olympus had engaged in speculative “financial engineering (zaitech)“, presumably arranged for it by its investment bankers, starting in the late 1980s. Like virtually everyone else who did this in Japan, Olympus lost its shirt. It covered the losses up, again presumably using a service (tobashi) provided by its brokers. This generated a cycle of progressively larger cover-ups and money-losing speculations that lasted over two decades. The fake M&A was an attempt to get money to pay off creditors and end the cycle once and for all.
what’s new
Olympus has avoided delisting by providing the Tokyo Stock Exchange with accurate accounting statements by a mid-December deadline. The “new” Olympus has book value of about a third of what it had previously claimed.
The stock lost about 60% of its value since the Woodford firing.
Two American funds managers appear to have held close to 10% of the company’s stock at the time the scandal broke.
The newest chairman of Olympus appears to me to be proposing that:
–the company’s board needs only a symbolic shakeup (where one or two members make a ritual expression of regret and resign), and
–Olympus should recapitalize by issuing stock to other members of the Fuji group, like Canon or Fuji Film.
my thoughts
Olympus is a typical Japanese technology-related company. It’s torn between the need for constant innovation to keep up in an increasingly complex and rapidly evolving world and its presence in a social/cultural environment where preserving the status quo is acknowledged as perhaps the highest goal.
Current management seems to be in the process of arranging a “traditional” solution to Olympus’s problems–one that doesn’t probe too deeply and where a new corporate direction launched by change of management is completely out of the question. It sounds like other Fuji companies are willing to help this happen.
In other words, business as usual in Japan.
My guess is that this is the most likely outcome. After all, except for what I think of as counter-culture companies run by younger Japanese, this has been standard operating procedure when companies get into trouble for the twenty-five years I’ve been watching the Japanese stock market.
Any signs that this time will be different should be studied carefully for potential to be a bellwether of change. (I’m not optimistic, though.)
I’m most curious about the foreign professional investors who held large positions in Olympus. Didn’t they know anything about Japan? Did they really think that buying companies with low price to book or price to cash flow ratios would bring the same kind of success it does in the US? Didn’t they see that this approach has failed time after time in Japan?
Apparently not.