Wednesday, September 30, 2009

SOS Bob Prechter Story

Reflationary Environment Puts Pressure on All Traditional Investments
2009, June 19

U.S. Equities to Fall After Bear Market Rally
2009, May 29

How Do You Know When to Get Out of a Short?
2009, March 2
(audio Interview)

Time to Cover your Short Positions
2009, February 25

"Silent Crash" Now Shouting: Volatile Bear Market the Result of Deflation
2008, October 28

Falling Fannie, Freddie, Silver, Gold and Commodities Confirm Outlook for Deflation
2008, August 20

Bear Market in U.S. Stocks, Credit, Real Estate
2008, June 25

Deflation - NOT Inflation - Suggested by Gold, Silver and Oil
2008, May 7

Gold and Silver Are Now Primed for a Downturn
2008, March 19

Dow-Gold Ratio Shows Bear Market Underway in US
2008, February 27

Credit Inflation and Then Deflation: “The Fed Can’t Stop What’s Coming.”
2007, November 27

On the Anniversary of Black Monday, Prechter sees “Silent Crash” in Progress
2007, October 19

SOS Changing Your Mind








Bill Gross (PIMCO) - Turn from Inflationist to Deflationist (increase Treasuries from 27% to 44%)
Martin Weiss (MoneyandMarkets.com) - Turn from Deflationist to Inflationist


MyView
My Analogy based on US statistic
Private debt - 45 trillion
Public debt - 12 trillion
Total Debt - 57 trillion
Other debt/commitment not included
Derivatives - 100 trillion
Socialcare, Medicare, Medicade - 30 trillion
GDP - 14 trillion
Consumption - 10 trillion
Market Capitalisation = 14 trillion
Assume PE of 14 - Earnings is 1 trillion p.a.
Dividend Yield = 2.5% = 0.35 trillion
Earnings - Dividend = 0.65 trillion = Free Cash Flow (FCF)
Private Debt = say 20yrs tenure = 45/20 = 2.25 trillion repayment p.a.
Interest = say 2.5% p.a. = 1.125 trillion
Total REPAYMENT = 3.375 trillion
With only FCF = 0.65 trillion
Loan repayment = 3.375 trillion
How is US corporation going to settle this amount?
Most debts will turn bad, then bankruptcies, then unemployment, then consumption drop and savings increase.
Do you think bank will give out more credits during this period? Most banks and housing lenders will go under other than those too big to fail.
The deleveraging will far exceed the money printing (only very little will flow into consumptions, because most stimulus goes into toxic assets, and banks dare not lent, and borrowers dare not borrow due to already high gearing)
Of course, the market is very fluid at the moment, Fed may print a couple of more trillion, and it may delay the deflation process, but unlikely to stop it. So, the risk of deflation will come first and then (many years later), the last deflation (is on the US dollars) which other called it inflation or hyperinflation.
Watch what they do, not what they say?

Saturday, September 26, 2009

SOS Bob Prechter


Excerpted from The Elliott Wave Theorist, by Robert Prechter, published September 15, 2009

As Bloomberg reports, economists are now nearly unanimous that the “recession” is over. But I believe they are mistaken in calling it a recession. Since 2000, we have not had two recessions but a slowly developing depression, with rallies. The trend toward depression began in 2000, and it will not bottom for another five to eight years. The economy has been in weak expansion mode for most of this time (this is when commodities had their final runs), but the prosperity of 2000 remains a high-water mark, so the long term trend in the economy is down. Massive credit inflation through early 2008 hid this fact from most observers, because many economic statistics such as GDP were distorted into seemingly positive trends by the collapsing value of the dollar from 2001 to 2008. Certain ratios—see for example Figure 13, a graph of the employment rate—tell the true story. As you can see, it topped when the stock market did, rallied when the stock market did, and fell with it again. Notice that the mid-decade bounce fell well short of a new high, fitting the phony B-wave nature of the stock rally.


The official economic figures are still useful, because they include the effects of inflation, thereby revealing the willingness of people to issue or take on debt, which is almost always an expression of optimism. Deflation is typically evident when the official figures indicate recession—such as in 2001 and again in 2008-2009. The latest rally in stocks and commodities has accompanied the temporary return of inflation, which in turn has brought signs of an impending official “recovery.” But it is mostly another illusion borne of optimism, as a weak dollar—a result of expanded credit—has once again puffed up the economic data. But this trend will roll over shortly behind the stock market, and we will once again see that the economy is on an undulating toboggan ride to the bottom of the valley.
MyView
15,000 economists in US did not see the crisis coming in 2008 in USA. So, the same lot is saying the worst is over? Common, even my kids wouldn't believe them. However, it is also critical that we read the economy correctly because it will have adverse impact on our investments (esp for USA stocks, commodities, bonds etc). Meanwhile, as we see the depression play out (next 5-8 yrs), the investment profile should be majority cash and there would be many undervalue stocks, commodities, other asset class in USA few years down the road. I guest, the right sequence how the US economy will develop is deflation (first), then only many years later when recovery comes, inflation will follow. Or you can have the boom and bust of inflation in between the long painful deflationary depression. So, good luck to your investments and 2009/2010 most likely will be a repeat of 2008, only this time is more fierce.

Friday, September 25, 2009

SOS Economic Experts








There are basically two main group of economic experts:
  1. Deflationist Depression
  • Robert Prechter @ www.elliotwave.com

  • Gary Shilling @ agaryshilling.com

  • Micheal Shedlock @ google Mish

  • Dr Steve Keen @ www.debunkingeconomics.com

  • Harry S. Dent @ www.hsdent.com

2. Inflationist Depression

MyView

If you notice, both schools predicted depression. The only different is the deflationists predicted most prices will fall (assets and consumables) during the deleveraging period and inflation will set it later, hence, they advise to keep cash/liquid until the debt or credit is substatially cleared (takes at least a few years). The inflationists argue that the stimulus will cost hyperinflation, so most would suggest to buy gold, and commodities (hard assets so to speak) and USD currency will sink drastically. Based on my readings, the deflationist school explanations or arguements are more comprehensive. The detailed (omitted by most inflationists) is the significant of debt deleveraging (i.e. consumer will change their mood from overspending to savings and bank do not lent due to toxic assets held and consumer do not borrow due to "unemployment" and inability to gear up further) Signs of deflation:

  • US consumption is dropping
  • Unemployment rate increases at slower rate
  • US saving rates is increasing
  • banks are cancelling millions of credits
  • 95 banks in US had declared bankrupt
  • US reserve for banks has surged

But one cannot deny the inflation sign as well:

  • prices of insurance, healthcare, utilities, educations, has increases over last 9 months (although deflationist argue that this is due to intervention by government and it is a lagging indicators, i.e. going forward next 5 yrs, it will drop) but price of gasoline has dropped, so is natural gas, rental has dropped, etc


  • US dollar has dropped drastically since Sep 2008 to Sep 2009 (deflationist argue that the deleveraging impact will temporarily wipe off the continue collapse of US dollar)
However, just look at it mathematically: US corporate debt is USD45 trillion vs GDP of USD14 trillion 320%. This is excluding Derivatives of easily USD100 trillion and future government commitment to medicare, social care of another say, USD30 trillion and what about consumer debt? It is very doubtful the printing of money can outpace the deleveraging of the market. This is further proven by Japan crisis in 1990s. Steve Keen did say, the government should give the money to the debtors instead of the banks (proven that it is more effective). Anyway, increasing debt will never be able to solve the existing debt.

SOS Some Economic Theory is a Myth


HOW DID WE GET INTO THIS MESS? 15,000 economists missed the 2008 Mother of Great Depression. Have anyone ask, is the theory they learned could be a fallacy?

By Dr Steve Keen @ www.debunkingeconomics.com

The fundamental of economics ignore:
  • time
  • uniqueness of capital
  • specific skills of labor
And the Theory is based on:
  • capital & labor is "infinitely flexible" within countries
  • can move without "loss" between industry
Globalisation promoted involves
  • overidding rights for transnational corporations
  • free movements of capital (not labor)
  • uninhibited repatration of profits
Failed prediction of Globalisation:

Minimum yearly wages
80-84 95-99
Mexico (USD) 1,343 768 down 43%
USA (USD) 6,006 8,056 up 34%

There are many fallacy in the modern economic theories such as:
  • competitive advantage
  • privatisation
  • marginal utility theory of value
  • assumed general equilibrium
Has the market system behaved as economic theories predict?
  • Asian crisis (blamed on cronyism) vs Dotcom burst
  • Japan lost decades
So has reality failed to live up to theory?
  • theory predicts market economy will be unstable
  • then why assumption of equilibrium?
  • economics assumed equilibrium but models won't converge to it (let alone real economies)
This is mainly due to
  • majority ignore dynamics, assume can apply equilibrium models to non equilibrium system
  • economists continue to insist that linearity remains a good assumption for all time series, despite the fact economic theory provides little support for the assumption of linearity
Fallacy of economic policy
  • free trade is always better than protection
  • market price is always better than subsidised ones
  • private is always better than public/government
Econophysics likely to give time based answers:

Hypothetically
  • the economy may grow faster with regime of initial protection that is gradually reduced
  • subsidised prices may be necessary until income distribution becomes fairer
  • industries with large externalities and economics of scale may be better in public hands until technology changes
Econophysics might finally

  • divorce ideology from economics
  • make economics more realistics

Wednesday, September 23, 2009

SOS Who Buying Real Estate?


Think again, is it the owner or the bank is buying the real estate? You put 10%, what about the remaining 90% loan and the interest?

All balloning of credit, will cause delation (all prices goes down at different rate and sector).

  • Inflationist is missing on the unpayable ocean of debt, as the value start to disappear; and
  • over estimating the Fed desire and ability to inflate the money supply. Fed is unable to change the trend, they are merely following the short term move.

Elliot wave forecast the social mood. Social mood now is saying it is going towards deflation. Add 160 pages in Conquer the Crash. Realising soon, after S&P 500 increases 55%.

Crash has not ended, has only begun, probably is the last high you can take advantage.

How do we then explain deflation in the rises of prices of the following:

  • education costs
  • insurance
  • income tax
  • sales tax
  • food prices increase
  • healthcare costs increase
  • increase in motor tax
  • water price increase

Bob Prechter said it is because the meddling by the US Government, and usually the lagging indicator of the deflation.

  • Focus on this, bailing out of banks (not consumers) because bank have given out trillions of uncollectable loans.
  • consumer is savings or not spending due to unemployment, inability to rely on stocks or property to support their loans etc.

One of the precondition of deflation is the inability to pay the huge ocean of debt created over the last 15 years of about USD53 trillion in corporate debt plus derivatives plus social care, medicare etc.

Deflation goes hand in hand with depression. Swapping IOUs will not help as 90-95% are going default.

Monday, September 21, 2009

SOS Investor or speculator?


Vanguard guru John Bogle (Dec 2008 interview by fool.com) He is the Warren Buffet type invetor, buy and hold forever.


  1. Buy and hold forever (investor) - capture market return via corporate earnings and dividend yield

  2. Speculator go on price (over or under) - based on price

  3. Next 10 yrs expectation is about 8-10% p.a.

  4. Founded index investing

  5. Allocate assets in equities, commodities, bonds etc. (depend on your age and risk profile)

  6. Mutual fund in long run will not outperform market return (chasing performance)

  7. How much is enough? Don't like to spend.

  8. Allocate intelligently, after that don't peak.

His 10 RULES in investing


1. There's no escaping risk.



Once you decide to put your money to work to build long-term wealth, you have to decide, not whether to take risk, but what kind of risk you wish to take. 'Do what you will, capital is at hazard,' just as the Prudent Man Rule assures us.
Yes, money in a savings account is dollar-safe, but those safe dollars are apt to be substantially eroded by inflation, a risk that almost guarantees you will fail to reach your capital accumulation goals.
And yes, money in the stock market is very risky over the short-term, but if well-diversified, should provide remarkable growth with a high degree of consistency over the long term.



2. Buy right and hold tight.



The most critical decision you face is getting the proper allocation of assets in your investment portfolio -- stocks for growth of capital and growth of income, bonds for conservation of capital and current income.
Once you get your balance right, then just hold tight, no matter how high a greedy stock market flies, nor how low a frightened market plunges. Change the allocation only as your investment profile changes. Begin by considering a 50/50 stock/bond balance. Then raise the stock allocation if:
(1) You have many years remaining to accumulate wealth;(2) The amount of capital you have at stake is modest (i.e. your first investment in a corporate savings plan);(3) You have little need for current income;(4) You have the courage to ride out the booms and busts with reasonable equanimity;
As these factors are reversed, reduce the 50 percent stock allocation accordingly.



3. Time is your friend, impulse your enemy.



Think long term, and don't allow transitory changes in stock prices to alter your investment program. There is a lot of noise in the daily volatility of the stock market, which too often is 'a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing'.
Stocks may remain overvalued, or undervalued, for years. Realize that one of the greatest sins of investing is to be captured by the siren song of the market, luring you into buying stocks when they are soaring and selling when they are plunging. Impulse is your enemy. Why? Because market timing is impossible. Even if you turn out to be right when you sold stocks just before a decline (a rare occurrence!), where on earth would you ever get the insight that tells you the right time to get back in? One correct decision is tough enough. Two correct decisions are nigh on impossible.
Time is your friend. If, over the next 25 years, stocks produce a 10% return and a savings account produces a 5% return, $10,000 would grow to $108,000 in stocks vs. $34,000 in savings. (After 3% inflation, $54,000 vs. $16,000). Give yourself all the time you can.



4. Realistic expectations: the bagel and the doughnut.



These two different kinds of baked goods symbolise the two distinctively different elements of stock market returns. It is hardly farfetched to consider that investment return -- dividend yields and earnings growth -- is the bagel of the stock market, for the investment return on stocks reflects their underlying character: nutritious, crusty and hard-boiled.
By the same token, speculative return -- wrought by any change in the price that investors are willing to pay for each dollar of earnings -- is the spongy doughnut of the market, reflecting changing public opinion about stock valuations, from the soft sweetness of optimism to the acid sourness of pessimism.
The substantive bagel-like economics of investing are almost inevitably productive, but the flaky, doughnut-like emotions of investors are anything but steady -- sometimes productive, sometimes counterproductive.



In the long run, it is investment return that rules the day. In the past 40 years, the speculative return on stocks has been zero, with the annual investment return of 11.2% precisely equal to the stock market's total return of 11.2% per year. But in the first 20 of those years, investors were sour on the economy's prospects, and a tumbling price to earnings (P/E) ratio provided a speculative return of minus 4.6% per year, reducing the nutritious annual investment return of 12.1% to a market return of just 7.5%. From 1981 to 2001, however, the outlook sweetened, and a soaring P/E ratio produced a sugary 5% speculative boost to the investment return of 10.3%.
Result: The market return leaped to 15.3% -- double the return of the prior two decades.
The lesson: Enjoy the bagel's healthy nutrients, and don't count on the doughnut's sweetness to enhance them.
Conclusion: Realistic expectations for the coming decade suggest returns well below those we have enjoyed over the past two decades.



5. Why look for the needle in the haystack? Buy the haystack!



Experience confirms that buying the right stocks, betting on the right investment style, and picking the right money manager -- in each case, in advance -- is like looking for a needle in a haystack.
When we do so, we rely largely on past performance, ignoring the fact that what worked yesterday seldom works tomorrow. Investing in equities entails four risks: stock risk, style risk, manager risk, and market risk. The first three of these risks can easily be eliminated, simply by owning the entire stock market -- owning the haystack, as it were -- and holding it forever.
Yes, stock market risk remains, and it is quite large enough, thank you. So why pile those other three risks on top of it? If you're not certain you're right (and who can be?), diversify.
Owning the entire stock market is the ultimate diversifier. If you can't find the needle, buy the haystack.



6. Minimize the croupier's take.



The resemblance of the stock market to the casino is not far-fetched. Yes, the stock market is a positive-sum game and the gambling casino is a zero-sum game . . . but only before the costs of playing each game are deducted.
After the heavy costs of financial intermediaries (commissions, management fees, taxes, etc.) are deducted, beating the stock market is inevitably a loser's game. Just as, after the croupiers' wide rake descends, beating the casino is inevitably a loser's game. All investors as a group must earn the market's return before costs, and lose to the market after costs, and by the exact amount of those costs.



Your greatest chance of earning the market's return, therefore, is to reduce the croupiers' take to the bare-bones minimum. When you read about stock market returns, realise that the financial markets are not for sale, except at a high price. The difference is crucial. If the market's return is 10% before costs, and intermediation costs are approximately 2%, then investors earn 8%. Compounded over 50 years, 8% takes $10,000 to $469,000. But at 10%, the final value leaps to $1,170,000 - nearly three times as much . . . just by eliminating the croupier's take.



7. Beware of fighting the last war.



Too many investors -- individuals and institutions alike -- are constantly making investment decisions based on the lessons of the recent, or even the extended, past. They seek technology stocks after they have emerged victorious from the last war; they worry about inflation after it becomes the accepted bogeyman; they buy bonds after the stock market has plunged.
You should not ignore the past, but neither should you assume that a particular cyclical trend will last forever. None do. Just because some investors insist on 'fighting the last war,' you don't need to do so yourself. It doesn't work for very long.



8. Sir Isaac Newton's revenge on Wall Street - reversion to the mean.



Through all history, investments have been subject to a sort of Law of Gravity: What goes up must go down, and, oddly enough, what goes down must go up. Not always of course (companies that die rarely live again), and not necessarily in the absolute sense, but relative to the overall market norm.



For example, stock market returns that substantially exceed the investment returns generated by earnings and dividends during one period tend to revert and fall well short of that norm during the next period. Like a pendulum, stock prices swing far above their underlying values, only to swing back to fair value and then far below it.
Another example: From the start of 1997 through March 2000, NASDAQ stocks (+230%) soared past NYSE-listed stocks (+20%), only to come to a screeching halt. During the subsequent year, NASDAQ stocks lost 67% of their value, while NYSE stocks lost just 7%, reverting to the original market value relationship (about one to five) between the so-called 'New Economy' and the 'Old Economy.'
Reversion to the mean is found everywhere in the financial jungle, for the mean is a powerful magnet that, in the long run, finally draws everything back to it.



9. The hedgehog bests the fox.



The Greek philosopher Archilochus tells us, 'the fox knows many things, but the hedgehog knows one great thing.' The fox -- artful, sly, and astute -- represents the financial institution that knows many things about complex markets and sophisticated marketing. The hedgehog -- whose sharp spines give it almost impregnable armour when it curls into a ball -- is the financial institution that knows only one great thing: long-term investment success is based on simplicity.
The wily foxes of the financial world justify their existence by propagating the notion that an investor can survive only with the benefit of their artful knowledge and expertise. Such assistance, alas, does not come cheap, and the costs it entails tend to consume more value-added performance than even the most cunning of foxes can provide. Result: The annual returns earned for investors by financial intermediaries such as mutual funds have averaged less than 80% of the stock market's annual return.



The hedgehog, on the other hand, knows that the truly great investment strategy succeeds, not because of its complexity or cleverness, but because of its simplicity and low cost. The hedgehog diversifies broadly, buys and holds, and keeps expenses to the bare-bones minimum. The ultimate hedgehog: The all-market index fund, operated at minimal cost and with minimal portfolio turnover, virtually guarantees nearly 100% of the market's return to the investor.
In the field of investment management, foxes come and go, but hedgehogs are forever.



10. Stay the course: the secret of investing is that there is no secret.



When you consider these previous nine rules, realise that they are about neither magic and legerdemain, nor about forecasting the unforecastable, nor about betting at long and ultimately unsurmountable odds, nor about learning some great secret of successful investing. For there is no great secret, only the majesty of simplicity. These rules are about elementary arithmetic, about fundamental and unarguable principles, and about that most uncommon of all attributes, common sense.



Owning the entire stock market through an index fund -- all the while balancing your portfolio with an appropriate allocation to an all bond market index fund -- with its cost-efficiency, its tax-efficiency, and its assurance of earning for you the market's return, is by definition a winning strategy. But if only you follow one final rule for successful investing, perhaps the most important principle of all investment wisdom: Stay the course!

Sunday, September 20, 2009

SOS Don't wake me up please!


SOS are you Asleep?


The US market is way ahead of its fundamental. Anyway, fundamental is a lagging indicator.


Bank credit continue to contract, why?

Wow, the insider sell over buy ratio at historical high? Why?


Look at the Daily Sentiment Index, historical high in Sept at 89% and low at 3% in March 2009. Why?
Think harder and you will know why.



Saturday, September 19, 2009

SOS Financial Tsunami Again?


By Robert Prechter of Elliot Wave said in Sept



  • crude oil in the long run will go below USD10 per barrel

  • US stock market is waning, volume is shrinking

  • precious metal will retreat to lower

  • US dollar is gaining strength

  • housing prices will continue to drop in longer term

By Jeffery Kennedy of Elliot Wave expert on commodities said in June



  • Wheat is ripe to drop

  • Corn will drop lower than its 2008 low

  • Soya bean looks to go down

MyView



  1. First reaction from the majority is this two guys must be crazy going against the current

  2. So far up to Sept 19 they are proven wrong, gold exceed USD1000 per oz, S&P500 went up about 4-5%, housing prices improved, crude oil touches USD74 per barrel, sugar continue to goes up, US dollar slide further to historical low

  3. I have never seen experts can be all wrong in all respects, are they reading the right charts? Or are they too detached from reality?

  4. Well, only time will tell, tick tock tick tock.......

Well, for the bullish, they should enter the market to enjoy more gains and for this two guys, the berish camp, they will short gold, short housing, short share market, short commodities and long on USD.


What should we do then?


What do you think? Well I think the financial tsunami of 2008 will revisit us in 2009 with a vengence. This time round, it will be more fierce and more casualties. Very seldom do we see two experience experts got so completely wrong, almost less than 5%. So the question or the challenge to the investors out there, are you the inflationist or deflationist? It does make a different in your portfolio formation, because if you read it wrongly, boom, you may lose tonnes.



  1. Why don't we balance the both, we know long run, gold will go up (so buy gradually from small amount to huge amount i.e. short run you may be wrong if the two guys are right, but long run, more importantly you make money, of course you could have make more if you listen to the two crazy guys. You can try GLD, GDX (real gold) or crude oil (black gold) companies like APC again the word is gradually and don't forget (poor man's Gold) SLV, SLW;

  2. What about green gold (agriculture) PAGG and blue gold (water) PIO;

  3. Lastly, on currency, this is tricky, there are ETF for short or long USD (fiat gold). There are many ETF on bullish dollar like UUP and others.

  4. What about ETF on Inflation and on Deflation, yep, there are available too, such as TBT, TIPS, etc

So, if you are inflationist, your portfolio should be 70% inflationist (all types of gold) stuff and 30% as hedge (just in case you are wrong);


If you are delationist, your portfolio should be 70% CASH or money market, and 30% on inflationist stuff.


On another note, you may want to consider "uncovered gems" such as biotechnology, "catalyst" for telecomunications or "high dividend yield stocks". In short, disregard inflationist or deflationist, please do not miss out on realist investments - which goes up based on catalyst disregarding the share markets up or down or sideway, they will explode when the time are ripe. Of course, it is not easy, you may like to consider "sourcing" from experts.


Hey, I almost forgot, you can long or short major markets in the world, like shorting China shares (FXP), if you long China (FXI), what about long Brazil (EWY), and emerging market (E??)

Well, it looks like anything in this world can be invested upon, other than SPIRITUALITY, where you can invest you time in it.





Friday, September 18, 2009

SOS 3 different way to look at market

by Claus Vogt

Conclusion: Longer-Term Still Bearish, But Medium-Term I’m Bullish

Bringing all the above together you could draw the following picture for the stock market:
Valuations are high on a historical basis and a long-term negative, but medium-term they’re meaningless.


Macroeconomics are longer-term negative or at least doubtful, but medium-term bullish.
The technical analysis is long-term bearish, but medium-term bullish.


So all in all there’s a rather strong case for a medium-term bullish forecast for the stock market, tempered by a long-term bearish background. This picture should prevent you from getting careless or euphoric and make it clear that there are risks with getting fully invested.
But it also seems to be prudent to consider being partially invested in the stock market to profit from any medium-term surges. You just have to be very flexible and on the lookout for signs of renewed weakness.


This is no time for buy and hold investors. But there are attractive opportunities for medium-term oriented investors willing to buy now and get out on a moment’s notice.

Tuesday, September 15, 2009

SOS Lehman Anniversary 15 Sept




The day Lehman Brothers filed for Chapter 11 or Bankruptcy. The day to be remember and look back what exactly happen over the last 20 yrs in USA.

Well, time flies. A year is gone, a year of fear a 360 degree turn. The worst is over, Ben Bernanke said.

Let's celebrate!!!

Wait wait wait, lets just take a look at Singapore port, is the worst over? Over 500 ships without cargo and crews!

It is always easier to live in an imaginary world than the real world. One fine day, we will not be able to reconcile our imaginary world and the real world. When we wake up one fine morning, it will be a unpleasent shock!!




Sunday, September 13, 2009

SOS Insider Trading!

I could not download the S&P 500 insider tradings chart. Anyway, I will try later, but more importantly I like to described what is in that chart.

Sept 2008 to March 2009 Net Buyers
April 2009 to Sept 2009 Net Sellers

This could be a warning sign.

SOS Out of the Woods?

Observations and views of Gary Shilling for last 6mths - March 09 to Sept 09

  • overall view is DEFLATION will continue
  • savings are up (a turn from 1985 from +12% to -10% in 2008/9) but for last 6 mths savings had turn +5%
  • consumption debt has dropped +10% over the last few months
  • deleveraging in process - credit default swap has dropped from USD56 trillion a year ago to USD28 trillion recently
  • unemployment hit 9.7% in Aug 09 (although at slower pace)

MyView

My view is ss shown in the picture above. Most investor are looking at the rear mirror. Haven't they forgotten about Jan to Jul 2008? Will it repeat?



Saturday, September 12, 2009

SOS Chart




Gary Shilling is one of the best in analysing the US economy. Google him up.


SOS Agriculture


One of the common investment sectors by these experts is AGRICULTURE


  • Peter Schiff

  • Jim Rogers

  • Marc Faber

MyView


You won't go much wrong with agriculture sector actually, reason being lack of land, lack of farmers, higher population, improving per capital allow competition use of land. Perhaps, one should take some time to look for ETF on Agriculture. Some goes for global exposure, some on upstream, some on downstream etc.

SOS Optimist, Pessimist & Realist


The glass is neither half full nor half empty, it is just broken. Say whatever we like, whether recovery is here, or the worst is yet to be over, the world will normalise over the next few years, i.e. going back to its mean. Don't get carried away by the charisma of the president or his orator skills, or even his promises, review the action taken, use common sense, logic, basics to evaluate.
Well, it may not be as easy as common sense, logic or information we need. Even some of the economic data that comes out may not be accurate, hence, it can delude the people for a while.
Go over the action taken:
  • stimulus (credit easing) - BAD move, more debt, cause of problem is the over gearing by financials using the fractional system;
  • bailouts - assisting imcompetent company, encourage risk taking on the basis of too big to fail as well as buying up toxic assetsl that does not generate additional economic value
  • government nationalising many sectors in the economy, i.e. motor, energy, healthcare, insurance etc. Proven that government allocation of resources is not effective and efficient
  • non action against the derivatives

Then again, even if it may sound bad, with the politician and media, most will be deluded by them, so the financial markets may not follow the real economic data, however, when they move too far apart, it will comes back to reality.

MyView

Don't get overpump up if the financial markets does not follow the economic indicators, because the trend of the financial markets follows the social moods.

March 9 = Daily Sentiment Index 97% bearish about the market then it turn

Sept 9 = Daily Sentiment Index 90% bullish about the market (will it turn?)

I believe it will.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

SOS Currency Crisis?


Worth to take a look.

Andy Xie/August 29, 2009

The dollar is likely to remain stable over the next twelve months. It could stage a cyclical bull market in 2011 as the Fed raises interest rate to 5% and the lower US asset prices attract foreign capital. The cyclical bull market may last two to three years. The longer term prospect for the dollar depends on the US’s current healthcare reform. Its direction doesn’t appear promising. The US Congress may pass part of the Obama agenda that increases spending and not the part that cuts cost. The long term scenario for the dollar remains bearish.

I have changed my view on the dollar in two aspects. First, at the beginning of the year I thought that the dollar would make a new low on surging US fiscal deficit. The previous low was in April 2008 when the dollar index (‘DXY’) hit 71, 42% below its high in 2002. After Lehman Brothers went burst, the index rebounded by 20% quickly and peaked at 89 in early March, as risk appetite collapsed and the safe haven trade favored the dollar. When the risk appetite returned, it declined by 10% and has been range bound for three months. This has happened despite the overwhelming bearish sentiment towards the dollar, which triggered massive capital flow out of the dollar-based assets into commodities and emerging market stocks. What’s supporting the dollar is the surging US household and corporate savings that have more than offset the increase in the US’s fiscal deficit. As the US household savings continue to surge, the dollar is likely to remain stable.

According to the US Bureau of Economic Analysis (‘BEA’) the US personal savings rate rose above 5% in the second quarter of 2009 from 1% in the first quarter of 2008. The chances are that the savings rate could reach 8% by the end of 2009. It could rise further to 10% in 2010. The US federal deficit is likely above 10% of GDP in 2009. The household income is about 70% of GDP. The increase in the federal deficit is still greater than the increase in the US household savings. The gap is more than offset by the increase in the corporate savings. As the household sector saves more and spends less, the corporate sector needs to invest less. According to the US Census Bureau, the US’s trade deficit in the first half of 2009 was $217 billion, down from $351 billion in 2009. The narrower deficit reflects smaller savings shortfall in the US. It results in less need for foreign capital and, hence, less pressure on the dollar.

Second, I am now expecting that a cyclical bull market for the dollar begins in 2011 and lasts for two to three years, advancing it one year from my previous view. The view is mostly based on my expectation that the Fed would raise interest rate to 5%. Most analysts don’t expect the Fed to raise interest rate until the US’s economy is strong again. On that logic the dollar couldn’t recover as the weak US economy and low interest rate wouldn’t attract capital. I think that inflationary pressure will force the Fed to raise interest rate despite a weak economy. The US economy will remain weak despite low interest rate for three reasons: (1) the US household sector must boost savings for many years to pay down debts, (2) supply-demand mismatch takes time to rebalance, and (3) the US financial institutions are still saddled with bad assets and couldn’t boost lending for the foreseeable future. The US government has changed the mark-to-market rule for the US financial institutions so that they can carry toxic assets, possibly around $1 trillion and more than the total equity capital in the financial system, without worrying about consequences.

The US is handling its bad assets just like Japan did in the 1990s. Shouldn’t the weak economy prevent inflation just like in Japan? The difference is that the commodity prices are sensitive to the US interest rate and globalization isn’t helping to keep inflation down like before. Commodity prices are dollar denominated. If the Fed’s policy rate is low, it boosts financial speculation in the market. Surging commodity prices bring up inflation expectation and can trigger a price-wage spiral. At some point the Fed would need to target oil price.

Globalization was a dis-inflationary force for the past two decades. It is the opposite today. Costs are rising faster in emerging economies than in the US. The dollar has adjusted sufficiently against other major currencies but remain overvalued against emerging market currencies. However, emerging economies are holding down their currencies to promote their exports, which is causing asset inflation that in turn inflates their costs. The emerging market currencies are appreciating through inflation, which boosts inflation in the US through its imports.

A major difference between Japan and the US is in their exchange rate behavior after their bubble burst: yen appreciated but the dollar collapsed. Japan trapped itself in deflation as a strong currency and weak economy sustained a deflationary equilibrium with low interest rate. The weak dollar over the past three years has stored up a lot of inflationary pressure. The higher US interest rate is to compensate for the currency depreciation before.

In addition to the interest rate, capital will flow from emerging economies to the US starting in 2011. The asset inflation in the emerging economies is sustained by momentum. As soon as the momentum stops, investors will realize that asset prices in the emerging economies are much higher than in the US even taking into account their higher growth potential. Capital flow will reverse then. It would be similar to what happened in 1996-97. A long period of weak dollar before drove capital into emerging economies and caused their asset markets to stay bubbly for a long time. Most speculators thought that the bubbly situation would last forever. The catastrophe came when the dollar went into a bull market. Virtually every emerging economy went into a crisis. I wouldn’t be surprised that another bout of emerging market crisis may occur in 2012.

The cyclical bull market for the dollar may last for two to three years. It could bounce up by 20%. The dollar index may reach 100 during the period. It would be similar to the dollar’s situation in the early 1980s. The Fed raised interest rate massively to tame inflation. Even though the US economy wasn’t that strong and the fiscal deficit was large and increasing, the dollar rose substantially until the 1985 Plaza Accord. The coming dollar bull market may even be shorter.

Currency is like any commodity whose price depends on supply and demand. Its internal value is interest rate and external value exchange rate. For the past two millennia the currency in use is either gold or silver. The size of an economy determines currency demand. Before industrialization economic growth was imperceptible in human time. Hence, the demand for currency was fixed. If gold supply is stable, it is a perfect situation for price stability. When European colonial powers brought back massive amounts of gold and silver after the discovery of Americas, it led to inflation.

In the era of industrialization the rapid economic growth led to money demand rising faster than supply. Deflation became the norm during industrialization. The appreciation of money increased incentives for money hoarding, which could cause a deflationary spiral. Central bank was invented to increase money supply. The usual currency system was pegging paper money to gold, the so called gold standard. Its advantage is that the total currency supply could be much larger than the actual gold reserve through the multiplier effect of the credit system.

Paper currency has a tendency to depreciate, as its cost of increasing supply is relatively small. A popular economic theory is ‘money illusion’. It assumes that people cannot link immediately inflation to money supply increase. Hence, they are willing to work for the same amount of money for the same amount of work when money supply increases at first, i.e., tricking people into working for less. This assumption is the key to the effectiveness of Keynesian stimulus. The gold standard limits money creation as the central bank must hold enough gold for its printed money. It could manipulate total money supply by changing interest rate to influence the multiplier effect in the credit system. Without the gold standard money holders can only depend on a central bank’s goodwill for preserving the value of money.

The track record of central banks on preserving the value of money is quite poor. Since the gold standard was abandoned in 1971, the dollar has depreciated from $36 to 945/ounce of gold. In terms of gold price the dollar has depreciated by 96%. The Chinese Yuan was pegged to the dollar below 2 before its depreciation began in the 1980s. It is now 6.8. In terms of gold Chinese currency has depreciated by 99%. Such massive debasing of paper currency is unprecedented in human history.
MyView
USD currency dropped 96% since 1971 (remove of gold standard)
RMB currency dropped 99% since 1980s (as against USD into GOLD)
So, it is worth to keep some gold in view of hyperinflation for the long term.
So increase your gold reserve over time is not a bad idea, 5% p.a..
No one can predict the market, knowing roughly the trend is important.
I rather be half right and make money, than perfectly right but not making money.
The issue don't be an optimist or a pessimist, just be realistic and benefit from the current volatile market.

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

SOS Choose the President You Hate!


Obama will be the most hatred President in US, the this is why:

You're thinking like a socionomist! Here's what Bob Prechter wrote in his October 2008 Elliott Wave Theorist, right before the election: "Socionomics reveals that presidents do not affect social mood but rather that social mood determines how presidents are judged. Bush is the first President of the United States to be in office during a Grand Supercycle bear market, and it has been in force since just before he took his first oath of office. Even though his administration has been in charge almost entirely during waves a and b, the latter of which was a five-year recovery, he has still managed to become the least popular president on record, directly reflecting the degree of the bear market and exactly as The Elliott Wave Theorist predicted. This is not to say that Bush -- who pursued so many horrid policies -- is innocent of having earned the rating; it is simply to say that any president would have received low ratings, no matter what his policies were.

The next president will ride the bulk of wave c to the downside and, if he survives his term, will exit more despised than Bush. Objectively, you should vote for the person you like the least."

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

SOS Savings

Well, printing money did in short term:
  • improve confidence in financial sectors
  • cause inflation on certain sector (insurance and education and food)
  • increase public employment
  • improve stock markets and stabilised real property sector

But... from the chart you will see:

  • it did not change the trend of consumer confidence, consumer spending and job creation
  • in fact Americans savings has increase to 5% from negative a year ago
  • big chunck of money goes into buying toxic assets that does not generate new income
  • cause misallocation of resources
  • that the stock pile of unsold properties remain high
  • no major change in trading of derivatives
  • continue implotion of bad debts
  • reducing on credit limits on credit cards

MyView

Common sense tell us that due to the shrinking in consumer spending, as well as corporate capital investment points to a slow growth because the main contributor to GDP is normalising gradually. Hence until all the bad debts and toxic assets being restructure (a few years time), the money printed will not get into income generating assets. You may bring the horse to the water, but the horse is not drinking.


Sunday, September 6, 2009

SOS Can China Replaces USA


This is what Roubini said:


USA GDP = USD15 trillion vs China GDP = USD3 trillion

USA Consumption = USD10 trillion vs China Consumption = USD1 trillion

USA unemployment = about 7 million, China unemployment = about 30 million

USA over consumed, China over produced (when US stops consumming, China got to stop producing, and its domestic market cannot replace USA)


Verdict:


It is impossible for China to overtake USA in the next 2 to 5 years. Assume USA normalised GDP is USD12 trillion and China grow at 8% perpectually, China will need about 16 years to equate USA's GDP. So it is a myth that they said China can replace USA, perhaps in 20 to 30 years. But, anything can happen in 20 to 30 years. But I would bet on Asia to take over the Europe and USA in 20 to 30 years.

Thursday, September 3, 2009

SOS Confusing


Nobody can predict the markets (share, commodities, currency).


But with technical tools, one can forecast the trends in certain accuracy. But then again, when different people use different tools, the results can be totally opposite, then, it will be based on the accuracy of past trends of the techical tools. Even using the same tools, sometimes the readings may be different due to the input is different, the starting date of the data or info used.

A simple example is, when you start buying Bershire shares about 10 years ago (1999 to 2009), your yield would be even less than 10%.

As for normal economists prediction based on corporate earnings and economic indicators, normally they are rear mirror readers due to the fact the share markets are influence by more than just financial indicators, it has to go beyond that, what about liquidity, what about political, what about social mood, what about technology.

Not many predicted the Great Depression in 1930s? Not many predicted the global meltdown in 2008/2009 in US and Europe and Asia. Not many predicted the Asian 1997 crisis.

Technical tools are useful if they are tested and have high degree of accuracy.

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

SOS Faith and Fraud




“The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.”
"The cup is neither half empty nor half full, it is just leaking, thats all."
According to a lot of Ponzi schemes, such as Bernard Madoff, which link with the Jews, because a great sense of trust in the said group or faith in such a group. The ironic part of it is that the bigger it sound unbelieveable, the more the group trust such a scheme. I call it blind faith. It breaks a lot of families. Imagine, if your government is one big ponzi scheme, what will happen to its citizen, one big deluded society isn't it.
Well, like the realist said, adjust your sail, instead of complaining about the "government that we cannot change" or "expects one fine day the government to change", might as well adjust your expectation and live to the fullest.

SOS China Mania!

According to Peter Kendall, co-editor of Robert Prechter in the ElliotWave newsletter, said that Shang highed stocks mania will end up like the Tulib Bulbs Mania, South Sea Company Mania, DJIA in 1922 to 1932, NASDAQ in 1983-2007 (not ended yet), Nikkei 1949 to 2007 (not ended yet), and DJIA 1974 to 2007 (not ended yet). All mania end up lower than the 'Start' of the mania. For DJIA in 1974 is 1000 and hit the high of 14,000 in 2007. Now look as Shanghai, there are more to come.

MyView

Google for Peter Kendall, you may find his analysis interesting. China will not be an exception. However, one think they did not cover is UK, Russia, Latin America and Europe, I wonder if there are any manias over these continents, or it is not big enough to be stated. So for all those that "over" bullish of China, be cautious, that does not mean you cannot invest in quality stocks and still make money in the long run"