Tuesday, June 17, 2014 - What Could Go Wrong?

What Could Go Wrong?
by Sinclair Noe

DOW + 27 = 16,808
SPX + 4 = 1941
NAS + 16 = 4337
10 YR YLD + .06 = 2.65%
OIL - .30 = 106.60
GOLD un = 1272.70
SILV + .09 = 19.86

The FOMC, the Federal Open Market Committee started two days of meetings today; tomorrow they are expected to announce more of the same. The FOMC is largely expected to taper its asset purchase program by $10 billion to $35 billion. Effective July 1, the Fed is expected to lower its asset purchases to $15 billion in agency mortgage backed securities (MBS) and $20 billion in Treasuries. The Fed is also expected to maintain its current forward guidance language on federal funds rate support; in other words, they will keep telling us that rates might increase sometime next year.

The committee is likely to make some upgrades to its description of the economic outlook in its economic projections. The committee will probably need to reduce its 2014 real GDP growth forecast to take into account the Q1 disappointment, and we can probably expect the committee to reduce its unemployment rate forecast and lift its inflation forecast slightly.

The consumer-price index climbed a seasonally adjusted 0.4% in May from a month earlier. It marked the fastest increase since February 2013 and doubled the pace of economists' forecasts. Excluding food and energy components, so-called core prices increased 0.3%, the fastest pace since August 2011. From a year earlier, core prices were up 2%, the most since February 2013, and now match the Fed's target.

Another inflation measure closely watched by the Fed, the core personal-consumption expenditure, has stayed far below 2%. Inflation at wholesale level unexpectedly dropped by 0.1% in May, but remember the PPI rose 0.6% in April, so this is just a leveling out process. Wage pressure remains stubbornly low and consequently, the pace of the economic growth remains uneven. In May, the real average hourly wage fell 0.2%. Real wages have fallen three straight months even as inflation has picked up slightly.

The average hourly wage for a typical American worker registered just $10.28 in May, adjusted for inflation and measured in constant dollars. The real hourly wage totaled $10.31 in June 2009, the last month of the 2007-2009 recession. This is part of a trend that stretches back about 30 years.

Still, with core prices up 2% on an annual basis, the Fed will need to address the topic of inflation tomorrow. Let’s hope they also mention the lack of wage gains.

Another report today shows housing starts posted a bigger-than-forecast 6.5% decline. Housing starts declined to an annual rate of 1 million units last month from 1.07 million in April. What’s more, permits for new construction fell by 6.4% in May to a 991,000 annual pace, the slowest in fourth months.

The situation in Iraq is still bad. The ISIS rebels are about 40 miles north of Baghdad and seem intent on the idea of attacking the capitol city. Or they might attack the major source of revenue for the ruling government, and that means oil. One of three major oil refineries has now fallen under control of ISIS; the other two are in Baghdad and the south and not considered to be threatened at this time. About 2.5 million barrels of oil a day are exported from Basra, Iraq’s main port, located in the south.

The world consumes about 92 million barrels a day, so that would be a major disruption, and it would not be surprising to see prices jump; with price levels increasing along with the severity of the given scenario, running anywhere from a few dollars per barrel to a worst case of $200 a barrel.

Not too long ago, Iraq was claiming that it would be producing 12 million barrels a day by 2017. That now seems a little too optimistic.  At best, the ISIS rebellion guarantees that any potential additional Iraqi oil output gains are not going to materialize in the near future. No oil companies are going to invest in Iraq until and unless the situation stabilizes.

Although the consequences for Iraqi oil production of what has happened so far appear to be minimal, all this comes at a time when the earlier and still ongoing conflicts in Libya and Syria have already disrupted nearly 2 million barrels a day in world oil production. If Iraq’s recent 3 million barrels a day was also taken out, we would be talking about a significant disruption in world oil supplies, and likely an oil price in excess of $150 a barrel.

The worst case scenario sees a regional conflict break out that pits the Middle East’s Shiites (Iran) against the Sunnis (Saudi Arabia), leading to a compromise of the Strait of Hormuz. Forty percent of the world’s exported oil is transported through this waterway.

And if that isn’t enough, focus you attention on Ukraine. Yesterday, Russia announced it was cutting off natural gas shipments to Ukraine; today an explosion destroyed one of Ukraine’s main pipelines for gas headed to Western Europe.

EU-brokered talks failed to reach a compromise between the countries, which remain far apart on a “fair” price for gas. Ukraine’s state-run gas operator filed a suit in an international arbitration court, claiming $6 billion in overpayment for gas since 2010. Its Russian counterpart filed a suit of its own, alleging unpaid debts worth $4.5 billion on gas delivered since 2009. Until these cases are resolved, Ukraine will receive only gas it pays for upfront, and must not impede the flow of gas destined for the EU, which gets around 15% of its gas via pipelines that pass through Ukraine. There is another pipeline running from Russia directly to Germany, but still, the global energy picture looks less and less stable.

On Friday we reported that Tesla, the electric car company started by Elon Musk, was freeing up its patents, making its technology available to competitors. Now Nissan and BMW are considering negotiations for cooperation on charging networks; basically using and enlarging Tesla’s existing network of 97 charging stations in the US. Nissan already produces the electric Leaf and BMW last week unveiled the electric i8 in Germany.

So, why design new chargers and invest in building a whole new infrastructure for BMW and Nissan drivers? The Tesla network already stretches from coast to coast and is expected to expand rapidly over the next year. And Tesla leads in battery technology, with a gigafactory planned to start production in 5 years, which will be the biggest battery making facility in the world, producing 500,000 lithium-ion battery packs per year; more than enough for Tesla and its competition.

SolarCity, the largest US installer of residential solar panels whose largest shareholder is entrepreneur Elon Musk, announced that it plans to acquire solar panel maker Silevo and expand into manufacturing with new panel factories, likely including the world’s largest high efficiency solar panel plants in New York. At a conference call announcing the move, Musk said: "We expect to have to install 10 gigawatts [of high-efficiency panels] a year. If you look at the current capacity in the world, we're not able to do that right now."

It's not just a supply question. Solar panel prices have been falling in recent years thanks to a production boom in China; and the panels getting produced, though cheap, aren't terribly efficient and prices have begun bottoming out anyway. Prices might start climbing soon. Government subsidies for renewables start getting phased out in 2016, and the political environment for rebooting subsidies remains unstable at best. Plus, recent moves by the US to slap tariffs on Chinese panels likely served as a catalyst for looking into building the Silevo plant.

According to a study by two professors at the Stern School of Business at New York University and one professor from McGill University, a quarter of all public company deals may involve some kind of insider trading. The professors examined stock option movements, when an investor buys an option to acquire a stock in the future at a set price, as a way of determining whether unusual activity took place in the 30 days before a deal’s announcement. They determined statistically that the odds of the trading “arising out of chance” were “about three in a trillion.” [...] But, the professors conclude, the Securities and Exchange Commission litigated only “about 4.7 percent of the 1,859 M&A deals included in the sample.”

The study also says: “While the SEC has taken action in several cases where the evidence was overwhelming, one can assume that there are many more cases that go undetected, or where the evidence is not as clear-cut, in a legal/regulatory sense.” Plus another finding from the abstract: “Historically, the SEC has been more likely to investigate cases where the acquirer is headquartered outside the US.”

A new survey by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner, on behalf of Better Markets, finds voters regard Wall Street and big banks as “bad actors. A 64% majority believes the “stock market is rigged for insiders and people who know how to manipulate the system. Another 55% believes “Wall Street and big banks hurt everyday Americans by pouring money into ’get rich quick schemes’ rather than real businesses and investments. A 60% majority favors “stricter regulation on the way banks and other financial institutions conduct their business” and just 28% oppose. Support for stricter regulations inspires bipartisan support; most notably voters who own stocks are more likely to support stricter regulation than voters overall. And there is urgency in the issue because 83% of voters believe another crash is likely in the next 10 years.

Thursday, April 10, 2014 - Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride

Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride
by Sinclair Noe

DOW – 266 = 16,170
SPX – 39 = 1833 (-2.1%)
NAS – 129 = 4054 (- 3.1%)
10 YR YLD - .06 = 2.62%
OIL - .20 = 103.40
GOLD + 5.80 = 1319.10
SILV + .19 = 20.13

If you want to know why the stock market is up one day and down the next, and not just little moves but triple digit swings – I don’t know. If anybody says they know, they probably don’t. Maybe it’s the Fed, maybe it is earnings reporting season, maybe it’s a strong economy or a weak economy, or maybe the markets are just trying to imitate Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride. The one thing we know is that stock prices fluctuate, and over time a pattern or trend develops; right now things are wobbly.

In economic news, the Labor Department said that the number of people applying for unemployment benefits dropped to 300,000, the lowest level in nearly seven years.

The Treasury Department says the federal budget deficit for the first half of the 2014 fiscal year totaled $413 billion, down $187 billion from where it stood at this point last year, as tax revenue surged and spending sank.  In March, the Treasury collected $216 billion in taxes, up 16% from a year ago, helping reduce the deficit for March to $37 billion from $107 billion last year. 

Meanwhile, spending sank by 14%, or $40 billion; military spending has been cut, federal government jobs have been cut, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are no longer a drain but rather a contributor to the Federal coffers. Tax receipts have been increasing as the stock market improved (not necessarily today but remember last year was strong). Also, the economy has been better, not great but better. 

The budget gap last month was the smallest deficit recorded for the month of March since 2000. Over all, the deficit is expected to equal 4.1% of gross domestic product in 2014, down from nearly 10% in 2009, during the depths of the recession. It is the fastest four-year reduction in deficits since the demobilization after World War II.

California is sinking. Scientists estimate that the Central Valley accounts for about 20% of the groundwater that is pumped in the nation. It's the lifeblood of the flourishing agriculture industry, producing crops from almonds to plums, nectarines and cotton. And the water to irrigate is pumped from aquifers that are not being replenished by rainfall.

The US Geological Survey published a study that found that 1,200 square miles of the Central Valley were sinking half-an-inch per year, but the rate is not consistent everywhere. The town of El Nido, just south of Merced sank almost a foot a year between 2008 and 2010. A foot a year is not sustainable. You can’t really mitigate against a foot a year.

Farmers are digging deeper wells, and as the water is pumped out of clay aquifers, the earth above falls to fill the void, and the clay compresses. It’s called subsidence. The land sinks and the compressed clay cannot hold as much water as it once did. Once subsidence happens there is no way to undo it.

About 30% of California’s water supply comes from underground supplies, more during droughts, and about 80% of state residents rely to some degree on groundwater. Some towns, cities and farming operations depend entirely on it. And it has been a problem for a long time. Three generations ago, so much groundwater was pumped from aquifers that half the valley sank like a giant pie crust, sagging 28 feet near Mendota and inflicting damage to irrigation canals, pipelines, bridges, roads and other infrastructure.

The sinking only stopped because of 2 massive government funded irrigation projects, the federal Central Valley project and the California State Water project, which flooded the region with water from distant mountains and relieved pressure on the natural underground water supply. Now, the drought and climate change have opened up a new era of groundwater pumping. The result is the ground is sinking and the land subsidence is perhaps the worst ever seen in California.

This causes multiple problems for infrastructure. Dams and irrigation canals rely on gravity to move water, but when the ground sinks, the water doesn’t always flow as expected.  Flood safety is another concern; flood control channels might not perform as expected as levees sink. Bridges sag; well casings fail; and then there is the issue of the state’s multi-billion dollar high-speed rail line plotted to run through an area that is sinking by about a foot a year.

While the San Joaquin Valley faces the worst problems of land subsidence, other regions of California are dealing with similar problems on a smaller scale. The USGS has been studying sinking ground in the Coachella Valley for years in conjunction with the local water district. In a 2007 USGS study, researchers determined that the ground had subsided up to 4 inches in parts of La Quinta, with smaller effects in parts of Palm Desert and Indian Wells, during a year-and-a-half period from 2003 to 2005.In the Coachella Valley, the ground has sunk in some places where groundwater levels have fallen. Uneven settling has cracked the foundations of houses and fractured walls, swimming pools and roads.

After years of drought, water tables are dropping fast. Well-drilling costs are soaring. The biggest problem is the gradual, irreversible compaction of the earth that occurs when aquifers are pumped to historic lows. It doesn’t make the aquifer unusable. It just reduces the amount of water that can be stored in it, now and in the future.

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision released its final ruling on just how much derivatives traders have to hold in reserve to pay off on defaults. International regulators are trying to safeguard trades and bring more openness to a $700 trillion market, known for its secrecy.

Swaps are what investors use to help guard against risk (at least theoretically). They’re bought by pension plans and retirement funds to protect against fluctuations in interest rates, meaning they affect most people who own annuities. They’re used by the US government to limit exposure in the mortgage market and cut home-loan costs. Investors can also hedge an investment in a company by buying a swap that will pay them if a borrower stops paying its debts. They’re called swaps because investors and banks exchange, or swap, payments over time based on how interest rates move or how the creditworthiness of companies changes.

Think of it as a form of insurance, with a few major exceptions; swaps do not require an insurable interest. For example, you can buy life insurance for your spouse and your spouse can buy life insurance on you because you have an insurable interest in each other. Your doctor can’t buy a life insurance policy on your life because your doctor does not have an insurable interest. And when you think about it that is a good way to approach insurance. Otherwise, your doctor might buy an insurance policy on your life and then bet against you; which is essentially what many people did with swaps in the financial crisis; they bought insurance on mortgage debts betting mortgages would default.

More frequently, swaps dealers sold swaps to people or entities who didn’t need the swaps or didn’t understand the swaps; for example the city of Detroit or the nation of Greece; they bet interest rates would go one way, and then they took on more debt than was prudent and when rates turned, they lost everything. Swaps made bankers billions of dollars before helping to blow up the global economy in 2008.

The other significant difference between swaps and insurance is that insurance companies must have reserves to pay claims. Swaps dealers, not so much; and so when defaults happen, the swaps contracts have a nasty history of not covering the risks they are supposed to cover. In other words, they never paid their claims.

After the crash, regulators set to work to make them less dangerous, through changes that in the process would make them less profitable. Where swaps had been one-on-one deals before, now they would be backstopped by third parties in clearinghouses that ensure everyone can pay, with the aim of avoiding emergency bailouts and panic. And the new Basel Rules now applies a minimum 20% risk weighting to money deposited at clearinghouses, which are third parties that guarantee the transactions. Note that is not a 20% in actual reserves, just a 20% risk weighting on money deposited at clearinghouses; big difference.

Today’s edition of “Banks Behaving Badly” features a hedge fund, SAC Capital Advisors, run by Steven A. Cohen. A judge has accepted a guilty plea from the hedge fund firm as part of a $1.2 billion criminal settlement for insider trading. In total, SAC Capital has agreed to pay $1.8 billion to resolve criminal and civil probes into insider trading. The Department of Justice said that payout is the largest insider trading settlement in history. The judge said: "These crimes clearly were motivated by greed, and these breaches of the public trust require serious penalties."

Now here is the peculiar part; if these breaches of the public trust require serious penalties why would they not include prison time? The answer is that you can avoid prison if you can pay enough money. SAC Capital has lots of money. Manhattan U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said: "Today marks the day of reckoning for a fund that was riddled with criminal conduct." Not exactly. Today marks the day SAC Capital writes a check and continues on; that does not constitute a day of reckoning.