Showing posts with label exports. Show all posts
Showing posts with label exports. Show all posts

Thursday, May 29, 2014

Thursday, May 29, 2014 - First Quarter GDP and Extreme Weather

First Quarter GDP and Extreme Weather
by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 65 = 16,698
SPX + 10 = 1920
NAS + 22 = 4247
10 YR YLD + .01 = 2.44%
OIL + .79 = 103.51
GOLD – 2.70 = 1256.90
SILV + .02 = 19.14


The economy was worse than expected in the first quarter. The first estimate of first quarter gross domestic product showed 0.1% growth. Today, we got the second estimate and it showed 1.0% contraction. We figured the second estimate would show contraction but most estimates were calling for just 0.1% to 0.6% contraction. The newly revised estimate incorporates additional economic data released in recent weeks. Higher-than-expected imports and slower-than-expected inventory growth dragged the economy into negative territory.

US based corporations posted slightly lower, after tax, seasonally adjusted, first quarter profits of $1.88 trillion for the quarter, down from $1.905 trillion in the fourth quarter; but those numbers were not adjusted for inventory valuation and capital consumption adjustments; we know corporations are still holding bloated inventories. A big buildup in private inventories boosted economic growth in the third quarter of 2013, but left a hangover that weighed on growth in the first quarter of 2014. Inventories subtracted 1.62 percentage points from GDP growth, compared with an initial estimate of 0.57 percentage point subtracted from growth.

Business investment declined at a 1.6% pace, revised from an initially estimated decline at a 2.1% pace. Spending on structures fell at a 7.5% pace and spending on equipment fell at a 3.1% rate. Investments in intellectual property, like research and development, rose at a 5.1% pace.

Consumer spending grew at a 3.1% pace in the first quarter, revised up from an initial estimate of growth at a 3% pace. Spending on services, like health care and household heating, grew at a 4.3% pace while spending on physical goods rose at a more modest 0.7% pace.

The housing market was a drag in the first quarter and the revisions didn’t create much change; residential fixed investment contracted at a 5% pace, a little better than the original estimate of a 5.7% decline, and that subtracted 0.16% from GDP.

Exports fell at a 6% pace in the first three months of the year, not as bad as the initial estimate of 7.6%, but imports, which are subtracted from the GDP calculation, rose at a 0.7% pace, compared with the initial estimate that they declined at a 1.4% pace. Net exports subtracted 0.95 percentage point from GDP growth.

Total government spending subtracted 0.15 percentage point from GDP for the quarter, compared with an initial estimate of 0.09 percentage point subtracted from growth. Federal spending added to GDP, state and local government spending subtracted slightly from GDP.

So, it was a nasty GDP revision but don’t worry, be happy because it was weather related and the winter storms and polar vortexes have passed; gray skies have cleared up, put on a happy face. One headline today tries to tell us: “Why the GDP Drop Is Good for the US Economic Outlook”; the thinking is that there is pent-up demand; consumers and businesses will brush off their cabin fever and rush out to buy and sell. Another headline tries to maintain perspective by reminding us that: “The US Economy Had a Hiccup, Not a Heart Attack”; which is almost a valid point; this wasn’t a heart attack, but it wasn’t a hiccup either. That article says, “This isn’t a recession or even the beginning of a recession though.” True, but this is how recessions start, with economic contraction, but this isn’t a recession.

The economy changes slowly, even though economic numbers jump up and down, and the numbers can be tricky. For example, in October 2008, the numbers on the economy showed GDP had dropped 0.3%, not nearly as bad as today’s number. Back in 2008, Lehman Brothers collapsed and the politicians said we faced a global financial meltdown.

Back in May 2007, the markets looked a lot like they do today, very low volatility, troubling signs for housing stocks, and a stock sector rotation that suggested the bull market was long in the tooth. That bull market ran for 5 more months. Whether investors knew it or not, they were incurring a large risk for only a few percent reward.

The numbers don’t always reflect the scene on the street. Maybe they do, but more than likely, this is not the start of a new recession. This is how recessions start and the strange part is how most economists are just glossing over this as if it were nothing but a hiccup, when it actually represents billions of dollars; one percent of a $17 trillion dollar economy; some hiccup.

The blame is squarely placed on the weather without acknowledging that the weather is undergoing massive change, not just the polar vortex of winter, but let’s look at the wildfires of spring, and the drought of summer. The “weather effect” is not likely a one and done. The United States is currently engulfed in one of the worst droughts in recent memory. More than 30% of the country experienced at least moderate drought as of last week's data. In seven states drought conditions were so severe that each had more than half of its land area in severe drought. Severe drought is characterized by crop loss, frequent water shortages, and mandatory water use restrictions.

While large portions of the seven states suffer from severe drought, in some parts of these states drought conditions are even worse. In six of the seven states with the highest levels of drought, more than 30% of each state was in extreme drought as of last week, a more severe level of drought characterized by major crop and pasture losses, as well as widespread water shortages. Additionally, in California and Oklahoma, 25% and 30% of the states, respectively, suffered from exceptional drought, the highest severity classification. Under exceptional drought, crop and pasture loss is widespread, and shortages of well and reservoir water can lead to water emergencies.

Drought has had a major impact on important crops such as winter wheat. Just 29% of the entire US wheat crop is rated good to excellent; very poor to poor ratings are 78% in Oklahoma, 67% in Texas and 59% in Kansas. And even though much of Texas received rain in the past week, it may be a case of too little, too late. With the crop now heading out, there's not much hope for any recovery as we move deeper into the season. That likely means higher prices for your daily bread. Pasture land across the West is in generally poor shape; that likely means higher beef prices, which you’ve probably already noticed.

In the Southwest, concerns are less-focused on agriculture and more on reservoir levels. In Arizona, reservoir levels were just two-thirds of their usual average. In New Mexico, reservoir stores were only slightly more than half of their normal levels. And Nevada is the worst of all, with reservoir levels about one-third of normal.

The situation in California may well be the most problematic of any state. The entire state is suffering from severe drought, and 75% of all land area was under extreme drought. Restrictions on agricultural water use has forced many California farmers to leave fields fallow. At the current usage rate, California has less than two years of water remaining. And we know California is responsible for about half the nation’s fruit and vegetable supply.

This past February, US food prices jumped 0.4% — the largest one-month increase since September 2011. Then they jumped another 0.4% in March. Then another 0.4% in April. Fruit and vegetable prices rose even faster, at a 0.7% clip in April. The US Department of Agriculture says the California drought doesn’t seem to have affected vegetable prices so far this year and the agency isn’t predicting a catastrophic spike in food prices just yet. The USDA projects that food price inflation will be between 2.5% and 3.5% in 2014. That's higher than the rise last year, but it's in line with the long-term average of 2.8%.

There are a couple of reasons why we might not get hit in the wallet this year: farmers are shifting water use from some crops to others, cutting back on some crops, like corn and alfalfa that might be available from other places. This strategy is tricky; for example, California dairy farms depend on alfalfa for feed; if they have to import feed, it could increase dairy prices in the short term. Also, farmers are pumping groundwater. The problem is the aquifers are being depleted, even sinking in some cases, and losing their original capacity. In the short term, we adapt; but if the drought continues, next year could be a bear.

Commodity markets already have weathered record cold in the US that sent natural-gas futures to five-year highs and severe drought in Brazil that has nearly doubled coffee prices. Now meteorologists are predicting even more abnormal weather, thanks to the return of El Nino, a rapid and prolonged warming of the tropical Pacific Ocean, which disrupts normal weather patterns and would exacerbate the extreme climatic events already affecting many markets this year. Meteorological agencies say there is a 60% to 70% chance of El Nino occurring by the end of 2014, and a more than 50% chance it will arrive earlier, by this summer.

It's a significant event in commodities markets because El Nino affects weather patterns virtually everywhere. Past occurrences brought dry weather to West Africa, damaging the region's cocoa crop, and wet weather to Brazil, delaying the coffee and sugar harvests. India typically sees less rain in its monsoon during an El Nino year, which can mean smaller grain and cotton crops. In the US, El NiƱo could bring much needed rain to the southwest and California. If it comes.

But El Nino is not necessarily good news for commodity prices on a global scale; it tends to help soybean crops but harm corn, wheat and rice crops. And also remember that El Nino refers to an extreme weather event. When El Nino hit in 1997 it claimed an estimated 2,100 lives and caused $33 billion damage to properties.

No matter which way you look, the forecast calls for extreme weather, and that means the first quarter GDP wasn’t just a hiccup.


Wednesday, May 28, 2014

Wednesday, May 28, 2014 - Reflecting the Economy

Reflecting the Economy
by Sinclair Noe

DOW – 42 = 16,633
SPX – 2 = 1909
NAS – 11 = 4225
10 YR YLD - .08 = 2.43%
OIL – 1.03 = 103.08
GOLD = 4.70 = 1259.60
SILV - .01 = 19.13

The major stock market indices were lower, but it wasn’t a big move, and we’ve been 4 up days, so today’s pullback was nothing but a pause. What was interesting today was the move in the bond market. The yield on the 10 year treasury dropped all the way to 2.43%; that’s the lowest rate in almost a year. The 10 year treasury has dropped 22 basis points this month, meaning treasuries are on track for the best month since January. Now, remember that the Federal Reserve is supposed to be tapering, cutting back on large scale purchases of treasury bonds.  

What’s fueling the move? It’s hard to pinpoint one thing. Europe is facing some sort of monetary stimulus package from the ECB next week; meanwhile, a report showed German unemployment rose and that pushed yields on the 10 year bund to 1.28%; that trade then spilled over to the US markets, toss in end of month window dressing and there was likely a short squeeze. There are some big short positions on treasuries right now; more shorts than longs.

At the end of the day, the bond market is supposed to reflect the economy; not an exact image but rather a mirror image. And the US economy is probably not as strong as expected. Tomorrow, we’ll get a revised look at first quarter GDP. The initial estimate on GDP showed just 0.1% growth; a pathetic rate blamed on bad weather; the revision is expected to show the economy contracted by 0.6%, maybe worse. Since the recession ended in June 2009, US GDP growth has dipped into the red only once: the first quarter of 2011, when economic output contracted at a 1.3% rate. It appears likely to happen again. The economy was repeatedly disrupted by cold and snowy weather in the first quarter and much of the activity that did not take place then is occurring now during the warmer spring months. Wall Street expects second-quarter growth to snap back with a 3.8% gain.

But where will the springtime burst of growth come from? Exports? Not to Europe and not to emerging markets. The initial GDP report said net exports subtracted 0.83 percentage point from the GDP growth rate in the first quarter. It may be a bigger drag on growth in Thursday’s update. Construction? A bit, yes, but we continue to see the housing market looking soft. Construction lending is seeing a slow, steady recovery, but it remains 66% below its boom-era peak of $631 billion in outstanding loans in early 2008. Companies restocking their shelves? Not likely. Inventories subtracted 0.57 percentage point from GDP growth, according to the first estimate, and that could grow with this week’s revision; inventories remain high and consumer spending sluggish. Corporate profits? Yes sir that is an area of strength but it’s also a two-edged sword.

The Commerce Department is starting to release a new report on corporate profits. Pretax profits adjusted for depreciation and the value of inventories climbed 1.9% in the fourth quarter to a record $2.13 trillion on a annualized basis. Corporate profits as a percentage of GDP stood at 10.2% in the fourth quarter, just a touch below a record high. Corporate profits are now higher than they’ve ever been before.

Here’s the problem; whenever profit margins reach a high, they tend to peak and then rollover, with the stock market and the economy dragging behind in like manner. It’s tough to keep pumping out record profits, in part because profit margins often depend on cost cutting, not just revenue; there are limits to how much fat a company can trim and there are limits to how much a company can increase sales while simultaneously cutting back on R&D and capital expenditures. Right now, stocks are priced to reflect very high corporate profits. Any disappointment would shake that pricing structure and translate into big stock market losses.

Like any individual indicator, this is not an absolute. Corporate profit margins can remain at elevated levels anywhere from a single quarter to multiple years and don’t typically present an imminent warning threat to the stock market or economy until forming a major peak and sudden decline. Profit margins peak on average before the stock market by more than a year and before recessions by more than two years. It doesn’t work out this way all the time; in the early 70’s profits peaked with the market, and in the early 80’s profits peaked after the stock market, and it is possible that the lag time stretches out so far as to make the indicator more or less worthless.

The point is that there are other factors that must be considered. Think of profits as one measurement of the business cycle. So, despite the Fed taper, there is increasing likelihood that interest rates will remain low and possibly decline a bit; if rates decline, stocks are likely to move up with bonds, as we’ve seen can happen; and if falling long-term yields flatten the yield curve, that would increase the risk of a market crash. In a low-yield, low inflation environment, there is a good opportunity to grow profits and so those crashes tend to be preceded by periods of very strong returns. So the current bull market is likely to remain in place until inflation picks up or low-flation/deflation drags down profits.

Falling yields tend to be somewhat more bullish than bearish, but it’s a poor indicator for how the stock market will react. Falling yields are good especially when we are in a bull market, but they can be dangerous if they should drive down the yield curve spread to an unusually low level and then there is the lag effect I mentioned earlier. When the long end of the yield curve comes down that is good for stocks for a while; it can even result in parabolic increases in the short term, but it also indicates bad news for the broader economy, and eventually the bill comes due.

Yesterday we talked about the proposed new EPA regulations on coal fired power plants. Today we’ll talk about the backlash to those proposals; which, by the way, have not been officially proposed yet. It’s anticipated that the new EPA guidelines will try to reduce the percentage of US electricity generated by coal to 14% by 2030 from about 37% right now. Coal is the single biggest source of electricity generation in the US and has been for more than 60 years. The amount of electricity generated by natural gas would rise to 46% by 2030 from about 30% now under the EPA plan. That would make it the biggest generator of the nation’s electricity.

Meanwhile, opponents of the plan say it will increase the cost of electricity and cost jobs. The US Chamber of Commerce released a study showing it would cost the economy $50 billion a year and destroy a quarter million jobs. Sometimes they just pull numbers out of the air; these reports tend to overlook the externalities associated with a dirty fuel like coal, and also overlook the positive impact of cleaner fuels. Anyway, the mudslinging has started.

And a follow-up on the Detroit bankruptcy story. A task force has issued the most detailed study yet of blight in Detroit and recommended that the city spend at least $850 million to quickly tear down about 40,000 dilapidated buildings, demolish or restore tens of thousands more, and clear thousands of trash-packed lots. It also said that the hulking remains of factories that dot Detroit, crumbling reminders of the city’s manufacturing prowess, must be salvaged or demolished, which could cost as much as $1 billion more.

If carried out, the recommendations by the Detroit Blight Removal Task Force would drastically alter the face of the nation’s largest bankrupt city. They would also cost significantly more than the approximately $450 million that the city already plans to spend on blight, raising questions about the feasibility of the vast cleanup effort, which is part of its larger campaign to emerge from bankruptcy by fall and begin remaking itself.

The blight study, which is perhaps the most elaborate survey of decay conducted in any large America city, found that 30% of buildings, or 78,506 of them, scattered across the city’s 139 square miles, are dilapidated or heading that way. It found that 114,000 parcels — about 30% of the city’s total — are vacant. And it found that more than 90% of publicly held parcels are blighted. The report also made several recommendations for preventing blight in the future, including changes to property tax and foreclosure laws, and heavy fines for scrap metal theft.


The basic plan is to clean up the city, but nobody really knows how to go about the task. Do you clean up by tearing down or do you clean up by building or rebuilding? For years, some have contemplated consolidating some of the city’s neighborhoods to allow the city to provide services to a smaller area, more suited to its shrunken population; Detroit has gone from 1.8 million to about 800,000. And if they don’t get this right this time, it will likely revert to farmland.