Place Your Bets
by Sinclair Noe
Let's
start with the important numbers today: 5, 16, 22, 23, 29, and the
Powerball 6. And I did not win.
Somebody
in Missouri and somebody in Phoenix are holding the winning tickets.
Not me. All I'm holding is a $10 piece of paper which is my donation
to the tax fund for the mathematically challenged.
DOW
+ 36 = 13,021
SPX + 6 = 1415
NAS + 20 = 3012
10 YR YLD un = 1.62%
OIL + 1.23 = 87.72
GOLD + 6.00 = 1726.80
SILV + .50 = 34.27
SPX + 6 = 1415
NAS + 20 = 3012
10 YR YLD un = 1.62%
OIL + 1.23 = 87.72
GOLD + 6.00 = 1726.80
SILV + .50 = 34.27
The
U.S. economy grew at a 2.7 percent annual rate from July through
September, much faster than first thought. The Commerce Department
said growth in the third quarter was significantly better than the 2
percent rate estimated a month ago. And it was more than twice the
1.3 percent rate reported for the April-June quarter. The main reason
for the upward revision to the gross domestic product was businesses
restocked at a faster pace than previously estimated. That offset
weaker consumer spending growth.
The
fourth quarter GDP is expected to drop back down below 2 percent
because of Hurricane Sandy, which put the brakes on all sorts of
business activity along the East Coast. And then the other reason
cited for the possible fourth quarter slowdown is the fiscal cliff.
(Sorry, we just can't get through the day without talking about it.)
So, here is the annotated version of today's fiscal cliff report: a
little partisan sniping, a few snarky comments; no substantive
progress, but talks are ongoing. Despite all the hype about the
fiscal cliff, the markets appear to be treating it more like a fiscal
bunny hill. The VIX, the volatility index is scraping along bottom at
about 15, indicating a broad based complacency. And if you're
actually paying attention to one of those countdown clocks, you
really need to be doing something different.
Anyway,
back to the GDP report. Consumers and businesses appeared to be more
cautious over the summer. Consumer spending grew at a weaker 1.4
percent rate in the third quarter, down from the 2 percent rate
estimated a month ago and nearly in line with the 1.5 percent rate in
the second quarter. Businesses spending on equipment and software
fell at an annual rate of 2.7 percent in the third quarter, the first
decline since the depths of the recession in April-June 2009. The
report showed continued strength in homebuilding, which rose at an
annual rate of 14.2 percent. And government spending expanded at an
annual rate 3.5 percent, marking its first positive contribution to
overall economic growth in two years. The increase was driven by a
big jump in defense spending.
Consumer
spending will be a big part of the fourth quarter GDP, and it looks
like we are still consuming. The National Retail Federation reports
the number of shoppers in stores and on websites rose 9% over the
Black Friday weekend to 247 million. Spending per shopper rose 6% to
$398 and total spending was up 13% to $59 billion. Retailers were
very promotional as we have to come expect during the kickoff of the
holiday season. Deals were offered earlier with many stores opening
on Thanksgiving and seeing good traffic. Online retailers were at
least matching in-store deals and offering many of their own
promotions even before Cyber Monday. Black Friday and Cyber Monday
promotions appear to be holding for at least an extra week; that's
not great for margins but overall it looks like a pretty strong start
to the shopping season.
If
you've been doing most of your shopping online Microsoft has launched
a holiday season offensive against Google, claiming that search
results on its rival's shopping site are bought and paid for.
Microsoft says: "Google’s new redesigned shopping vertical now
decides what to show you -- and how prominently to display what
product offers they show -- based partially on how much a merchant
selling the product has paid Google.”
This
refers to new rules that Google adopted for its shopping site. Google
Shopping now charges merchants who participate in its Product Listing
Ads program fees on a per-click or cost-per-acquisition basis. Google
makes no bones about the program. They say their relationship with
merchants results in accurate and timely pricing information.
Microsoft begs to differ. Google's pay-to-play program means the
results that potential shoppers get will be based more on what
merchants are willing to pony up than on query relevancy.
The
point here is that if you are shopping online, it might pay to
comparison shop by using different search engines, at least that's
what Microsoft wants us to believe.
Back to the GDP report. The report reveals a dichotomy between consumers and businesses. Consumers have gone from being cranky and tight-fisted to slightly positive and mildly optimistic. Businesses, meanwhile, appear to be hunkering down in like a gaggle of doomsday preppers.
The
most recent Conference Board consumer sentiment survey released
earlier this week showed consumer confidence at its highest level
since February 2008, while the University of Michigan consumer
sentiment index is up 30% from a year earlier as of late November.
The Michigan survey revealed more optimism about the employment
situation than at any point since 1984. Of course any measure of
consumers' feelings is bound to be subjective. And consumers have
been beaten like a drum over the past few years. The surge in morale
might be nothing more than a pause in the beatings.
So
while the surveys show the most positive results in years, it’s
possible that they are only positive relative to how negative people
were in 2009, 2010 and 2011, and that compared to the 1980s and
1990s, people aren’t actually feeling so confident. The same goes
for income: More people than at any point since early 2008 say their
finances are improving; that raises the index. But given that most
incomes have been stagnant for the past decade or more, improvement
does not necessarily translate into objectively good.
On
the flip side, business executives can't seem to get past this idea
that uncertainty is the boogie man that lurking in the shadows. The
big fear is the fiscal cliff, of course. And frankly it is
disconcerting to see the captains of industry cowering like an abused
dog. There is a real good chance that the CEO who is afraid of the
fiscal cliff, doesn't have the stuff of a real entrepreneur. An
entrepreneur will put a second mortgage on the house. An entrepreneur
will max out the credit cards to keep the business afloat for another
week, or another month. (truck full of canaries)
An
entrepreneur sees a fiscal cliff and straps on the bungee cord. A CEO
sees a fiscal cliff and breaks down in flop sweat.
From
2009 to 2012, the companies of the Standard & Poor’s 500-stock
index generated double-digit profits and even healthier revenue
gains. Yes, it looks like corporate profits are slowing slightly but
corporate coffers are bulging; there seems to be a little resolution
to the crisis in Europe, even if it is just kicking the can out a
year or two; emerging markets may not be booming but Brazil, and
India, and China are still rolling along.
So,
who is right, the consumer or the business exec? Income levels tend
to be a better predictor of what people will spend, along with the
value of their homes and the ease of obtaining credit. Given that
incomes are stable and slightly growing, homes values are on the rise
and credit is easing, it’s a good bet that people will spend a bit
more and the overall economic picture will brighten.
Business
execs are lousy economic prognosticators. While spending by companies
is a key component of economic vitality, spending plans are much more
elastic than they were decades ago and can be adjusted more rapidly.
That may not be true for building a manufacturing plant, but it is
certainly true for hiring and marketing and inventory. So present
concerns and stated intentions to cut back could change quickly to
exuberance and plans to spend more freely.
A
separate report today showed the number of Americans seeking
unemployment benefits fell 23,000 to a seasonally adjusted 393,000
last week, the Labor Department said. It was the second straight drop
after Hurricane Sandy had driven applications to 451,000 three weeks
ago. Millions of Americans are unemployed and underemployed, but tens
of millions more are gainfully employed,and although they might be
feeling some anxiety about their job, most of the deepest corporate
cost cutting has already been done. If you still have a job, it's
probably because you're good at it, and the company you work for is
about as lean as it can get. If it could be outsourced, it probably
was. When people feel gainfully employed, they tend to spend and
demand increases, businesses respond to demand, not to sentiment.
Expectations
have undoubtedly come down in recent years, as people reconcile
themselves to more modest changes and more realistic horizons.
Business sentiment matters, but it is the consumer and the demands of
the consumer that push the economy. The smart business execs will be
on the lookout for indications of increased demand, and they will be
well suited to go out on the far end of the curve and they should be
ready to gamble just a little, ready to invest to meet demand.
Americans have shown a remarkable and consistent predilection to
spend over the years, with only a few notable pullbacks such as
during the worst periods of the past few years.
Take
it from someone who knows a lousy bet. You shouldn't bet against the
American consumer.
Years
ago, the late Mexican dictator Porfirio Diaz utter a famous line
about his country: “Mexico, so far from God, so close to the United
States.”
Next
week the leaders of North America’s two most populous countries are
due to meet for a neighborly chat in Washington, DC. According to The
Economist The re-elected Barack Obama and Mexico’s
president-elect, Enrique Peña Nieto, have plenty to talk about:
Mexico is changing in ways that will profoundly affect its big
northern neighbour, and unless America rethinks its outdated picture
of life across the border, both countries risk forgoing the benefits
promised by Mexico’s rise.
The
White House does not spend much time looking south. During six hours
of televised campaign debates this year, neither Mr Obama nor Mr.
Biden mentioned Mexico directly. That is extraordinary. One in ten
Mexican citizens lives in the United States. Include their
American-born descendants and you have about 33m people (or around a
tenth of America’s population).
Mexico's
GDP ranks higher than South Korea. It's economy is growing faster
than the Brazil's. Can you name the largest exporter of flat screen
TV's? It's Mexico. And the place where you will likely see signs of
the growing Mexican economy is in the shopping malls. In addition to
TVs, they are the top exporter of BlackBerrys and fridge-freezers,
and is climbing up the rankings in cars, aerospace and more. On
present trends, by 2018 America will import more from Mexico than
from any other country. “Made in China” is giving way to “Hecho
en México”.
The
doorway for those imports is a 2,000-mile border, the world’s
busiest. Yet some American politicians are doing their best to block
it, out of fear of being swamped by immigrants. They could hardly be
more wrong. Fewer Mexicans now move to the United States than come
back south.
Undervaluing
trade and overestimating immigration has led to bad policies. Since
September 11th 2001, crossing the border has taken hours where it
once took minutes, raising costs for Mexican manufacturers (and thus
for American consumers). Daytrips have fallen by almost half. More
crossing-points and fewer onerous checks would speed things up on the
American side; pre-clearance of containers and passengers could be
improved if Mexico were less touchy about having American officers on
its soil (something which Canada does not mind). After an election in
which 70% of Latinos voted for Mr Obama, even America’s
“wetback”-bashing Republicans should now see the need for
immigration-law reform.
Mexico
is poised to become America’s new workshop. If the neighbors want
to make the most of that, it is time for them to take another look
over the border.
You
know who Rupert Murdoch is? Owns Fox News. The same Rupert Murdoch
who scandalized England with phone hacking, influence peddling and
bribery. The same Rupert Murdoch who stays up late Saturday nights
pondering things on Twitter, like what to do about "the
Jewish-owned press".
Murdoch
already owns the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, Fox News
Channel, Fox movie studios, 27 local TV stations, and much more. And
there are reports that he really wants to buy the Los Angeles Times
and the Chicago Tribune - the bankrupt-but-still-dominant newspapers
(and websites) in the second- and third-largest media markets, where
Murdoch already owns TV stations. Under current media ownership
limits, he can't buy them. It's illegal ... unless the Federal
Communications Commission changes the rules.
Just
by pure coincidence, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski has been
circulating an order at the FCC to lift the longstanding ban on one
company owning both daily newspapers and TV stations in any of the 20
largest media markets. And he wants to wrap up this massive giveaway
just in time for the holidays.
If
these changes go through, Murdoch could own the Los Angeles Times,
two TV stations and up to eight radio stations in L.A. alone. And
he's not the only potential beneficiary: These changes could mean
more channels for Comcast-NBC, more deals for Disney and more
stations for Sinclair Broadcasting.
For
anyone who actually cares about media diversity and democracy, the
gutting of media ownership limits will be a complete disaster. These
rules are one of the last barriers to local media monopolies. Without
them, we will lose competing voices for local news. We will see the
mainstream media get even more monotone, monochrome and monotonous,
and more than likely, even more inaccurate.
Genachowski's
proposal is essentially indistinguishable from the failed policies
that millions rallied against in 2003 and 2007. Ninety-nine percent
of the public comments received by the FCC opposed lifting these
rules when the Republicans tried to do it. Genachowski's proposal is
nearly identical to the one the Senate voted to overturn with a
bipartisan "resolution of disapproval" back in 2008. The
federal courts have repeatedly - and as recently as 2011 - struck
down these same rules, noting the FCC's failure to "consider the
effect of its rules on minority and female ownership." The 3rd
U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ordered the FCC to study the impact of
any rule changes before changing the rules. The FCC has done nothing
of the kind.
Yet
if Genachowski gets his way, according to reports, the FCC will vote
on this major overhaul "on circulation" - that is, in
secret and behind closed doors - with no public participation or
accountability.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.