The Burden of Rebalancing

Nothing good lasts forever, or so at least many would have us believe. I shall neatly leave it aside of whether this is true in a general sense but merely note that it appears that we are moving closer to some form of another of crunch here. And my rationale you ask? Well, let me simply note that it appears, despite the fact one would believe that investors’ and punters’ should know better, that we are headed right back into the same dead end as we did the last time the Dollar was canooled with the Euro taking center stage. Of course, this is not only a Euro story even if it may appear so and in this sense the current environment once again shows us the very real obstacles which exist in terms of correcting global rebalancing since while everybody seems to agree that this is what we need, nobody wants to hold the old maid represented by a role of importer with a strong currency.

Over at Macro Man, the Dollar’s recent plight to reflect lingering risk appetite and low volatility (mmm, the USD as the new carry funder) was given an acronym a long time in the form of DGDF (dollar-goes-down-forever) and I am very symphatetic to MM’s ending point in today’s installment;

It’s entirely possible for this liquidity/positioning/DGDF rally in risky assets to continue through year end; in many ways, it’s in everyone’s best interest for this to happen. But Macro Man can’t shake the feeling that we’re all repeating the mistakes of the last cycle (in fast forward, no less!) and that when the reckoning comes, it won’t be much fun.

In fact, Macro Man does one better I think since he also points to the very telling issue about Brazil and Turkey fighting tooth and nail to avert an appreciation by, among other things introducing taxes on capital inflows (so far, only Brazil has introduced this measure). I cannot tell you how strongly I feel the sense of deja-vu here since this is exactly what happened the last time the USD began a decline everyone hailed as natural and long overdue but whose counterpart in the form of the inevitable appreciation of other currencies was unduly and harsh. This narrative of course does not make sense and it will be interesting to see this time around where the discourse takes us.

In Europe, policy makers are fast becoming very nervous and although Trichet delivered his well known ECB-speak at the most recent board meeting; the mentioning of a worry of excess currency volatility is indeed, as Macro Man also notes, the closest we will come to the ECB expressing concerns over the flight of the Euro.

It is indeed funny to hear the staunch messages of Eurozone officials only to have them end with the almost laughable notion that the Eurozone is very committed to the US’ comittment towards a strong Dollar. I find it hard not to agree with first Macro Man that this latter committment may in fact be a myth and then secondly, and as a result, with Willem Buiter that the ECB will need at some point to get serious about the Euro, even if it will be interesting to see whether the ECB is really ready to act here either operationally or merely through a stronger discourse.

Meanwhile and despite the growing woes in Brazil and Turkey (and India) about shouldering the burden of global rebalancing, one economy that appears to be tackling it rather nicely is Australia where an AUD closely approaching parity with the USD does not seem to deter the RBA (hat tip: Stefan Karlsson).

A local analyst on the ground in the form of Commonwealth Bank’s chief currency strategist Richard Grace even ventured the forcast that the AUD/USD would move beyond parity and on to 1.10. I won’t dare confirming or denying this point forecast but merely note that as long as the volatility stays low and that risky assets, by consequence, lingers with an upward drift, it is steady as she goes.

So the real question to answer in this context of global rebalancing is not whether it will be sustainable, but rather which chain will break first. Will it be liquidity driven bounce in risky assets that suddenly runs out of steam or will it be a sudden surge in volatility brought about by an “unforseen” event. In the case of the latter I could mention a couple of sources of such an event, but so far the march goes on and the noose is tightening especially in the context of Europe the statements of policy makers are likely to become increasingly desperate.

In the end, it is not up to the Euro (or the JPY) to bear the burden of rebalancing which must fall on the shoulders of economies such as India, Brazil, Turkey, etc. The key here is that the US does need a weak Dollar to reduce the overall borrowing of the economy, but that this is not possible with one or two economies bearing the brunt of the adjustment process. This has long been a widely circulated fallacy in the sense that many have believed that we could simply twist the tables and move from one importer of last resort to another. This is not possible in the current context and is complicated by the fact that as our OECD economies age, they become increasingly reliant on external demand to spur economic growth.

It may take another round of old maid for global market participants and policy makers to get this and if this is the case, let us hope that Spain, Latvia, Germany, Italy, Japan and the rest of the de-facto export dependent economies won’t fold in on themselves.

Mao Nostalgia in China

On October 1, the People’s Republic of China marked its 60th anniversary with an impressive military parade, musical performances and portraits of Sun Yat-sen, Deng Xaiping, and Mao Zedong.

It’s the occasion for a boomlet for Mao nostalgia in China. This, one can kind of understand. He was the founder of the PRC. After liquidating his rivals, he was the maximum leader of the Chinese Communist Party.

Here’s today’s article on the nostalgia for Mao in China: Mao presides again in China as nostalgia runs high.

In the US, within the Obama administration, Mao Zedong is also enjoying a revival. Communications Director Anita Dunn commends him as a political philosopher to the graduating class of a parochial school. Manufacturing Czar Ron Bloom cites with approval Mao’s saying that “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun” ["Problems of War and Strategy" (November 6, 1938), Selected Works, Vol. II, p. 224].

The thing is this. In China, it is not Mao’s Communism that is being celebrated; the country has spent the last thirty years correcting the leftist errors of the previous thirty. Mao’s iconic image is a retail opportunity, something to build a business of jokey T-shirts and kitsch snow-globes around. Mao’s real reputation in China is as a nationalist (not a Nationalist, which in China is a different thing):

1 Mao would work with anyone, anywhere to resist Japanese aggression, including the Nationalists or the Americans.

2 Mao unified the war-torn Chinese mainland under Chinese rule for the first time since 1644.

3 In its first five years, the PRC under Mao was drawn into superpower conflict with the US in Korea, and managed to fight the nuclear-armed US to a draw on the peninsula.

4 When Mao fell out with Khruschev, the PRC found itself surrounded by enemies: the USSR to the north, Taiwan with its US backing to the east, India with its designs on Tibet and implicit backing of the UK, US, and USSR to the south. Mao prosecuted a war in the Himalayas and backed them all down, sustaining the country’s independence through a dangerous time.

5 Forty-five years ago this week, the PRC got the bomb; if any of the other powers thought attacking China would be easy, after that it meant mutually assured destruction.

6 When the time came for a new way forward, Mao came to terms with Richard Nixon, and it was easy for the two cold warriors, as if getting reacquainted with old friends. This upset the balance of power in the far east, putting the USSR on the defensive. As much as the US played the China card, China played the America card.

Seek truth from facts, as Deng Xiaoping always said. Mao Zedong’s reputation in his homeland has very little to do with his Communism at this stage, and everything to do with his nationalism. Which is fine — it is his homeland after all.

But like many others, I would like to know just what it is that his highly-placed admirers in the US Obama administration are getting out of Mao Zedong at this time.

Confiscating Certificates Of Confiscation

lawsuit over billions of dollars of unclaimed savings bonds is brewing over whether the Treasury Department or the States should be able to confiscate the minimal remaining value of these certificates of confiscation.  This article will be written from the first person perspective of the victim who has been robbed after investing in these ‘risk-free’ assets issued by the United States Treasury.

DILIGENT SAVER

In 1965, being a diligent young man my parents rewarded me for graduating from High School by buying me a $75 United States Savings Bond. Following this pattern of savings while I was in the United States Army in 1969 I saved $6.25 per month so that I could buy a $25 dollar savings bond each quarter. Upon hearing the news of unclaimed bonds being confiscated by either the States or the Treasury Department therefore today, October 19, 2009, I cashed in these United States savings bonds. The original face value of these 3 bonds was $125 Dollars. I paid $93.75 for these in the 1960’s.

If I had used gold and silver to buy these same bonds then it would have cost me 2 ounces of gold and 24 ounces of silver.  When I cashed these in today I received $825.11 which consisted of $93.75 in principal and $731.36 of interest.  The value of gold today is a $1,063.90 per ounce and silver is $17.81 per ounce.  Thus the $825.11 dollars represents 47 ounces of silver and no gold.  But that is not all.

TAXES

From the $825.11 dollars there is $731.36 of interest.  At approximately 30% tax rate that amounts to about $219.41 of tax liability.  Therefore, the net amount received is $605.70 and will purchase a mere 34 onces of silver.

OPPORTUNITY COST

If I had kept the gold and silver that I could have bought these United States savings bonds with back in 1965 and 1969 then I would have two ounces of gold and about 24 ounces of silver.  I could sell that bullion for about $2,850. What is wrong with this picture?

LYING GOVERNMENT

Newsmax reports, “The Treasury Department counters that it indeed tries to find owners of the unclaimed bonds, and says it has a Web site where people can simply type in their Social Security number to see if they have one.”

Diligent Saver responded, ‘Despite paying significant amounts of taxes for decades and using both a Social Security number and valid address while filing I never received a single communication from the Treasury Department about these outstanding savings bonds.  Nevertheless, they were extremely diligent notifying me when they thought I owed more taxes.’

CONCLUSION

There are significant assets available that may be confiscated by the government as unclaimed property.  The Treasury Department does have a tool to locate these certificates of confiscation.  While many argue that these types of assets are ‘risk-free’ this example plainly illustrates that these assets are subject to payment, counter-party and political risks.

On the other hand, gold and silver are immune to all of those risks except political.  For example, during some of the time period at issue the Ancient Metal of Kings was considered so dangerous by the United States government that it was illegal for residents in the Land of the Free to own.

But this is typical of fiat currency and the governments which issue it.  Neither the paper tickets nor costumed officials should be trusted.  In every case throughout history their paper coupons have over time proven to be merely certificates of confiscation.  And to think the Chinese own $2T of these silly little coupons!

DISCLOSURES:  Long physical gold, silver and platinum with no position in the problematic GLD or SLV ETFs.

Bad News Bears Battle Break-Neck Bounce


Phrases like dead-cat bounce, house of cards, stagflation, W-shaped, U-shaped, lackluster, sucker’s rally, deflation spiral, run-away inflation, and great depression were all in their pronouncements.

The bad news bears have pointed to a fearful, unemployed consumer who has cut up her credit card, has no more savings, and a government that has only racked up more national debt — the dollar is dead — they claim.

But the Q3 business realities continue to paint a starkly different picture.

Stimulus programs are firing up. Inflation is under control. Manufacturing lines are back on-line. Equities are on a roll. Optimism is accelerating.

So what are the doomsters missing?

Here’s what Barton Briggs (Managing Partner of Traxis Partners Investment Fund) writes in Newsweek:

“First and foremost, they are betting against America, the greatest entrepreneurial engine ever created. History says buy America when it’s down. In addition, emerging economies may well be the new dynamo of growth. They now account for 35 percent of world GDP and are growing two to three times faster than the developed world. S&P 500 companies now collect almost 50 percent of their revenues from overseas, and almost half of that portion comes from these fast-growing developing countries. Another factor could be that stocks currently despite the rally are still deeply undervalued. The rule of thumb is that stocks should sell at a price/earnings ratio equal to 20 less the inflation rate. Assume S&P 500 operating earnings are $70 to $75 next year and inflation is 1 percent, you get a theoretical price far higher than the current level of 1060.”

Not only will the second half of 2009 continue to be strong, but 2010 will likely reap the benefits of this new international growth dynamo. It will be interesting to see where and when the dead cat lands.

The King of Currencies

A reader has asked me to comment on these two recent GATA articles www.gata.org/node/7908 and www.gata.org/node/7911, which claim that London unallocated metal is a fractional reserve system.

Adrian Douglas’ assertion is that there is at a minimum four owners for each ounce of unallocated metal held in London. His support for this is to apply the ratio of average daily share trading in GLD (11.9m) to its shares outstanding (325m), rounding to a ratio of 1:30, to an estimate of the daily trading in gold in London to derive the amount of gold London should have. This is then compared to an estimate of what London does have, resulting in the 1:4 fractional ratio.

For his estimates of the London market, Douglas relies on a report by Paul Mylchreest. I haven’t had time to review Mylchreest’s numbers in detail, but his report takes a very logical approach and is fact based to estimating of the amount of gold in London. His conclusion is that there is

“an aggregate pool of gold of just over 16,866 tonnes of gold to support an average of 2,134 tonnes of daily spot gold trade. On this basis, 12.7% of the pool of available gold is being turned over every day on average. … And the entire pool is turned over every 7.9 working days. In my opinion, this level of trade relative to the estimated pool of gold liquidity is excessive and doesn’t pass the smell test.”

Firstly, he makes a series of assumptions to get to his figures. For example, his 16,866t figure relies on World Gold Council/industry estimates of above ground gold and the percentage that is investment. Being a trade organisation representing miners who want a high gold price one should expect that “stock” numbers will be estimated on the downside. When estimating what the real trading volume of gold is, then he steps into a more rubbery area because he is relying on only two guesses from some industry people – we need more than that.

As a result, one must consider his 12.7% turnover figure to have a fair margin of error considering all the assumptions and estimations used to derive it. This is not to say that it should be 1%, just that it is not a “hard” number.

Secondly, even if 12.7% is correct, I don’t think it logically follows that this “doesn’t pass the smell test”, a conclusion he comes to by comparing gold to equity, other commodities and fiat currencies. The last one is probably the most relevant. In this he has to again make some assumptions about currency trading turnover to come to a figure of 2.6% for Sterling, conceding that when including forwards and swaps “daily Sterling turnover is only equivalent to 8.4% of UK broad money”.

Why stop at Sterling? If one does the same calculations for the Australian dollar, you get 4.1% for spot and 13.3% including forwards and swaps. Does gold’s 12.7% (which could be lower if some of Mylchreest’s assumptions are changed) now appear as an “excessive amount of gold trading relative to the likely pool of available gold”?

Mylchreest’s final conclusion is that either 1. there is “more than one ownership claim on each gold bar” or 2. “there is far more gold bullion held in private hands than is acknowledged by current industry estimates”.

I would suggest that there is another OR that Mylchreest has not considered: the very fact that gold is no one’s liability and cannot be printed means it attracts a disproportionate amount of trading and speculation. Why is it assumed that 12.7% is excessive and unreasonable? Could not the 12.7% figure be proof of the special monetary nature of gold, proof that it is the King of Currencies?

I have spent a bit of time on Mylchreest’s report because it is the key input into Adrian Douglas’ calculations. Before I move on to his numbers, I would like to say that I have a lot of respect for Mylchreest’s report and look forward to it being improved with more accurate data.

On that, I note Mylchreest’s statement on page 25 that “I haven’t a clue what COMEX inventories were in 1997, but let’s assume 200 tonnes …” That information is available at Sharelynx.com going back to 1975. A subscription is required but would be worthwhile as Sharelynx has a lot of other data that would be very useful for Mylchreest’s analysis.

Now on to Adrian Douglas’ calculations. He is basically applying GLD’s turnover of 3.66% to Mylchreest’s turnover figure of 2,134t to come to an implied stock holding that London should have of 64,000t. This is then contrasted to Mylchreest’s estimate of 15,000t of non-leased physical to derive the 1:4 fractional ratio.

This analysis assumes that the behaviour of over-the-counter (OTC) players is/must be the same as those trading GLD. Let us consider each of Douglas’ statements in support of this.

“The purpose of buying investment gold is for it to store wealth. This necessarily implies that it is held for a long time.”

This is a very broad statement and one that I don’t think can be supported. Investors have all sorts of different time horizons. Remember we are talking about trading in unallocated and whether that is backed. The fact that it is unallocated rather than allocated bars would imply, if anything, that the investors have shorter time frames rather than long.

“If gold is bought and traded quickly it would destroy wealth, not store it, because there would be a large loss due to transactional fees.”

It is actually the other way around. The quicker you can trade something the less risk you have to changes in prices. Bullion banks have a spread between their bid and ask prices – they MAKE money from quickly trading gold. For those dealing with bullion banks in the OTC market, the tightness of those spreads combined with the volatility of gold mean it is entire reasonable for them to make money day trading gold.

“Considering these limitations [minimum trade limit of 1,000 ounces] it is likely that OTC participants would turn over a lot less than 1/30th of the inventory in a day.”

I do not see how the $1 million trade size must mean a lower turnover. That is not a big figure for wholesale market participants. With bullion bank spreads of $0.50 to $1.00, a 1000oz deal only means $500 to $1000 profit. This would mean that a spot gold trader would need to do a lot of trading to make a decent return on the capital employed, which means they would trade more frequently, rather than less.

As with Mylchreest’s comparisions to currency trading, I don’t think Douglas’ comparisions to GLD make any conclusive case that London gold turnover is suspicious.

For further support, Douglas notes that

“In the last 14 years the supply of dollars has increased from $4 trillion to $15 trillion (+275 percent) while the gold price has risen from $400 in 1995 to $1,000 in 2009 (+150 percent). How could this happen? … There has to be an alternative massive supply of gold to make the price rise slower than the influx of dollars.”

How it could happen is that those extra dollars were diverted into equities and house prices, rather than gold, pushing up their price more instead.

He also says that “If the OTC market traded only gold that was in the vaults on a 100 percent reserve ratio, there could never be a lack of liquidity.”

Lack of liquidity has nothing to do with stocks, backed or not. It has to do with a depth of buyers and sellers. If you have 100% backed unallocated, but few of the holders want to sell, then you have a lack of liquidity as well.

For some closing comments, I’ll quote Lawrence Williams from Mineweb:

“The big problem, though, with much of this kind of analysis is that the analysts and observers are working with a mixture of real and assumed figures. It thus tends to rely on statistics being manipulated, perhaps subconsciously, to support pre-conceived theories.”

From Alphaclone via SeekingAlpha: Galleon Group’s 50 Largest Holdings

My first employer on Wall Street was the world’s largest pension fund; my second, the fastest growing hedge fund. When I was at the first and interviewing for the second, I had this idea that the best hedge fund were investing on some higher plane, with qualitatively different instruments and strategies put to use by people who were just altogether smarter than those of us at conventional money managers. Once I was in a hedge fund, I realized that these people put their pants on one leg at a time, that they were subject to all the usual range of human abilities and weaknesses, and that their funds may or may not be better though they certainly were more expensive for clients.

Galleon’s top fifty holdings list from earlier in the year is utterly ordinary.

Wyeth went the way of all flesh on Friday; now part of Pfizer.

The founders of the Galleon Group, a hedge fund started in 1997 and which has a technology and healthcare focus, have been charged with insider trading. Galleon is one of the 250 hedge and institutional investment funds that are available on AlphaClone. The fund’s Top 10 Holding Clone, which invests quarterly in the the fund’s ten largest holdings at the time they are disclosed, is up 48.2% so far this year but has not performed very well over time returning a negative 3.9% annualized over five years and a dismal negative 18% annualized since 2000 (all returns as of 10/15/09 close). We thought we’d list the fund’s 50 largest holdings below (as of 6/30/09). Now that the fund will almost certainly wind down, perhaps there are some good short opportunities.

Name Ticker
1 EBAY INC EBAY
2 GOOGLE INC GOOG
3 APPLE INC AAPL
4 OSI PHARMACEUTICALS… OSIP
5 BANK OF AMERICA COR… BAC
6 JP MORGAN CHASE & CO JPM
7 CISCO SYS INC CSCO
8 SPDR S&P 500 SPY
9 DELL INC DELL
10 NVIDIA CORP NVDA
11 E M C CORP MASS EMC
12 WYETH WYE
13 PEPSI BOTTLING GROU… PBG
14 MEMC ELECTR MATLS INC WFR
15 First Solar Inc FSLR
16 VERISIGN INC VRSN
17 YAHOO INC YHOO
18 ELECTRONIC ARTS INC ERTS
19 SPDR Gold GLD
20 INTEL CORP INTC
21 QUALCOMM INC QCOM
22 COGNIZANT TECHNOLOG… CTSH
23 FORD MTR CO DEL F
24 NATIONAL SEMICONDUC… NSM
25 NETEASE COM INC NTES
26 SUNTRUST BKS INC STI
27 TYCO INTERNATIONAL LTD TYC
28 TERADYNE INC TER
29 RESEARCH IN MOTION LTD RIMM
30 ALCON INC ACL
31 HEWLETT PACKARD CO HPQ
32 VISA INC V
33 AMAZON COM INC AMZN
34 BIOGEN IDEC INC BIIB
35 NOVELLUS SYS INC NVLS
36 ANADARKO PETE CORP APC
37 COMMSCOPE INC CTV
38 FTI CONSULTING INC FCN
39 PEPSICO INC PEP
40 ABERCROMBIE & FITCH CO ANF
41 F5 NETWORKS INC FFIV
42 LAM RESEARCH CORP LRCX
43 LEXMARK INTL NEW LXK
44 GAP INC DEL GPS
45 Seagate Tech STX
46 YINGLI GREEN ENERGY… YGE
47 RADIOSHACK CORP RSH
48 KLA-TENCOR CORP KLAC
49 FIDELITY NATIONAL F… FNF
50 ALLERGAN INC AGN

Japan – In the Eye of the Beholder

After a nice and entertaining week in Barcelona where I had the privilege not only to hold a seminar at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, but also to meet a host of interesting people, I thought that it would be about time that I finished my piece on the latest data from Japan which admittedly will be a bit backward looking, but hopefully interesting nonetheless.

Beauty, as they say lies in the eye of the beholder and perhaps this axiom is worthwhile contemplating when thinking about the immediate condition of the Japanese economy or indeed the global economy and her asset markets, but for the sake for simplicity.  Consider for example the news, out a week ago, that Japan’s current account surplus widened 10% in August over the year. In an economy where external demand is the main driver of economic growth, this is a significant piece of news and should rightly be interpreted as a positive sign. Or should it?

Once we read beyond the immediate headlines it becomes clear that what we are really seeing in Japan is, in fact, a pendant (even if less severe) to the Spanish situation where the improvement in the external balance comes, not from a sustained and independent pick-up in external demand, but rather from the fact that domestic demand is contracting faster than external demand thus pushing up the current account. In Japan, exports slid 37.1% on the year but as imports shed a corresponding 41.2%, the current account improved as a result. Naturally, some would want to insert the point here that since Asia (and in particular China) seem to be the locus of small, but definitely noticeable, upbeat signs in the global economy, Japan should be at the forefront to snap up the gains. Surely this is true, and one wonders how far exports would have tumbled on the year if China had not been there to pick up the slack; yet, as we can see from the figures above; the downward momentum remains in spit. It seems, that beauty indeed is a subjective concept.

With respect to the most recent event as it were in the Japanese economy, the BOJ meeting held last week did not really bring much new to the table with respect to policy measures as rates were kept in QE mode. However, and as Societe Generale’s Gleen Maquire points out in a recent publication (the weekly monitor) the point is moving closer with respect to whether the BOJ will extend its extraordinary credit measures or stop them. This would then be a discussion about the much debated exit strategies by part of especially the G3 central banks; how it will be conducted and equally as important when. The current message seems to be that while it is difficult to see the BOJ abandoning ZIRP any time soon, the BOJ is not going to extent the current measures of credit support in the form of the purchase of corporate bonds and commercial paper as well as a special funding program for corporate finance facilitation from the point of view of banks. As Maquire correctly points out and regardless of whether ZIRP is set to continue or not, a withdrawal of these measures would naturally represent a de-facto policy tightening and it is unclear just what the effect will be on the Japanese economy.

Moving on to a piece by piece look at the recent monthly data, August’s numbers did bring with it a bit of light (September number will be out at the end of October) although the fundamentals have hardly changed.

Kicking off with domestic consumption, the headline figure reported by the statistical office clocked in a nice increase of 2.6% y-o-y which is of a magnitude not seen since January 2008. It is interesting to differentiate the headline figure of 2.6% (which is a real figure) is in somewhat stark contrast to the nominal decline in the consumption of workers’ households of 1.4%. At this point, the average monthly change on an annual basis for the overall consumption index in Japan is -1.2% (up from -1.8% before the 2.6% figure reported from August); I will hold off any premature conclusions of a sustained pick-up in consumption before seeing what is in store in the coming months.

With respect to prices, Japan now looks thoroughly entrenched in deflation;

The general core index thus declined 2.2% over the year with the core-of-core index declining 2.6%. So far in 2009, the core-of-core index has declined 8.3% with an average monthly decline of 1%. This is a strong testament to the strong downward momentum in the domestic economy and underpins the following very reasonable assessment by Glenn Maquire;

Realistically, it will be very difficult for the Bank to forecast positive inflation over the next two to three years. The Consumer Price Index continues to fall sharply and the output gap remains extraordinarily large by any metric. With the yen now appreciating and political opposition to a stronger yen having passed with the Liberal Democratic Party losing power, Japan is likely to remain more at risk of deflation than inflation over the entire period including calendar 2012.

Especially the point on the output gap is important even if we don’t observe this specific data point. I would add the qualifying comment that one thing is the size of the output which in some sense would signify the immediate damage incurred by the Japanese economy in the context of the financial crisis and another thing is the speed (and ability) with which Japan can close this output gap on the basis of domestic activities alone. A point that I would especially emphasise here is the simple fact that the potential growth rate of Japan is likely to be in an almost perpetual decline due to the demographic situation. In this sense, it may increasingly become a question of what in fact the potential growth rate is based on domestic activity (i.e whether it is positive at all) than a matter of closing the output gap.

On the labour market, things improved rather surprisingly in August with the unemployment rate declining from 5.7% in July to 5.8% in August.

In the context of the financial crisis, the unemployment rate has so far increased roughly 2% and although the number in no means is alarming in a relative sense, the prospect of a continuing increase is sure to make cautious consumers even more cautious.

Turning finally to the corporate sector, industrial production has recovered somewhat after the absolutely horrid decline observed in the first half of 2009. The question is the extent to which we should see this as a decisive positive sign or not.

Once again, this is a matter of interpretation but when for example the Swedish bank calls it a “new dawn” for industrial production after looking at the graph above I find it difficult to see exactly where this dawn is. Consequently and while it is certainly true that the index for industrial production has recovered some ground after bottoming out in February 2009, it is still situated 18.3% lower than its average value (measured from January 2003 to July 2009). This compares with an index for all industrial activity running some 7% below its historical average. These numbers are innocuous in themselves, but the important thing is the level of activity which can be supported by the Japanese economy and although we are certain to see some recovery in the data the underlying momentum may ultimately disappoint.

The chart to the right taken from JPMorgan’s Global Datawatch is perhaps the clearest picture of what export dependency means in the case of Japan and how it drives the level of industrial activity.

With respect to the Tankan, the survey showed a pick up in sentiment which follows leads nicely the pick up in real economic activity. Pessimists still outweigh optimists by a rather large margin and it shall be interesting to see whether the apparent (and indeed lingering) positive sentiment among global market participants will spill over forcefully into expectations and investment plans moving forward.

Summary – A Beauty or a Beast?

Some of you may feel that I am spinning the story of Japan too much towards the negative sign. I don’t believe this is the case however, and although I can see that some positive signs have emerged, I remain skeptical that it will be enduring. Call me a permabear, but 3-4 years of Japan watching has taught me to be careful when it comes to emphasizing positive news on the Japanese economy, and especially so when it comes to the momentum of the domestic economy.

This brings us to the global economy and the simple fact that the extent to which one would narrate the outlook on the Japanese economy in relative positive light would be tantamount to the extent that one also sees a relative benign outcome for the global economy. Here I am also skeptical which is ultimately also why I remain cautious on Japan and especially so in an environment where the JPY does not seem to benefit from low volatility and risk proneness to the same extent as before the Fed engaged in QE. But that is certainly a discussion for another day; for now, I will leave you my dear reader with the judgement on the immediate outlook for Japan’s economy remembering full well that beauty indeed lies within the eye of the beholder.

Join the forum discussion on this post - (1) Posts

Jobs Created

I just cringe whenever I hear Obama or his minions talking about how they created or saved N jobs. As an economist, I’m trained to look for the other side of the coin. Yin and Yang. The coin cannot not have another side if it is to be a coin. So when the government takes money from taxpayers, or prints up new money, or borrows money from China, to spend on creating jobs, I have to ask: how many jobs did the stimulus destroy?

Movement on Corporate Bonds

Shilpy Sinha and Swapnil Mayekar have a story in Business Standard offering some optimism about the corporate bond market. They point out that in the six months from April to September 2009, corporate bond turnover was Rs.1.6 trillion, when compared with Rs.0.5 trillion in the same period of the previous year.

SEBI has decided to force many market participants to do netting by novation at a clearing corporation when trading on the corporate bond market. From 1 December 2009 onwards, there will be two possibilities for a trading mechanism:

  1. OTC trade, reported on one of the three trade-reporting systems, run by BSE, NSE and FIMMDA, or
  2. Order book trade, run by BSE or NSE.

But regardless of how trading takes place, counterparty risk will be eliminated, and netting efficiency obtained, through the clearing corporations. This will be a big win compared with the awful settlement mechanism that’s used today. It should reduce transaction costs on this market.

The deeper problems of corporate bonds remain:

  1. The lack of a liquid GOI yield curve along with interest rate derivatives, so as to be able to layoff interest rate risk when holding a corporate bond portfolio,
  2. The low values for loss-given-default, given the lack of a bankruptcy code and
  3. The ban on credit derivatives.

The workaround for #2 is: to stick to trading in short dated bonds from issuers where the failure probability is very low. A workaround for #3 is: to utilise information about credit risk embedded in the stock price.

The right way to think about the corporate bond market is in the context of the Bond-Currency-Derivatives Nexus, which emphasises the interlinkages between the government bond market, interest rate derivatives, corporate bonds, credit derivatives, the currency spot and currency derivatives. All these markets have to achieve liquidity with active arbitrage. The key ingredient for getting there is unifying the regulation and supervision at SEBI. This should address the bulk of the problems of corporate bonds — other than the problem of loss-given-default.

Gold Rising As A Currency

On 9 October 2009 I was interviewed by Business News Network, Canada’s premier financial channel, live from the NASDAQ in Times Square New York about the rise of gold.

BNN HOST:  A note that caught out eye from RunToGold.com saying “Gold price rise pretends another round of the Credit Crisis. … Gold in Q2 2010 $1,300.”. Joining us to talk about that prediction, Trace Mayer, financial blogger and author of The Great Credit Contraction. He is in the city so nice the name that twice New York, New York. Very happy to be with us, Trace.

TRACE: Oh Thank You.

BNN HOST: You said the credit crisis has not been calmed but intensified. Why?

TRACE: Yes, one of the reasons is that the FASB mark-to-market has just obfuscated the toxic assets. So it is preventing the credit liquidation. So we still have the same bad assets that have not been liquidated in the market on the balance sheets. But people do not necessarily know where they are lurking.

BNN HOST: So the idea that the stimulus package and government back stops, things of that nature, have really delayed the inevitable more than anything else?

TRACE: Yes. They have delayed it and they have just pushed it off. And because people continue to make misallocations of capital because of that government intervention.  It will only lead to bigger crisis later.

BNN HOST: Ok. When is later though?

TRACE: Well, we have been pushing this off for decades now.  It seems to have really picked up in 2007 and the next round appears to be coming pretty soon. Mostly because of the move into gold. We see it closing at $1,050 this week and it now has a 3 week moving average above $1,000 and so there is a lot of strength. And a reason is because gold functions as a currency.

BNN HOST:  Really the only currency that does not have obligations.

TRACE:  Yes, it is a currency that at all times and in all places remains money. And there is a difference between money and currency. Gold is money because it can never become worthless.  As you say it is no one’s liability.

BNN HOST: What is really moving gold on a day to day basis though, more speculation than actual demand. Is that accurate?

TRACE: Yes, there is a lot of speculation along with the central bank gold price suppression scheme. Because gold is a competitor to their fiat paper franchises they have a heavy vested interest in interfering with the gold market. So in the short term we do see a lot of central bank interference.  But now it appears that Greenspan’s Call which is leasing gold should the price rise has been counteracted by the Beijing Put which appears to be putting quite a floor in the gold market.

BNN HOST: You have an interesting graphic in the report of the Day, an inverted pyramid, explain this to us.

TRACE: Yes. This inverted pyramid is the liquidity pyramid and shows the different assets in the world economy. And what has happened over hundreds of years is capital moved up the pyramid into less safe and less liquid assets. And that was the great credit expansion. And now we have reached the top and economic law shows that capital moves down the liquidity pyramid. And that is the great credit contraction; capital moving into safer and more liquid assets.

For example, capital is moving out of auction rates securities or commercial mortgage backed securities and into Treasury Bills. And eventually it will move from Treasury Bills into the monetary metals. And the reason for that is that fit currency and central banking are barbarous relics that are not really needed in the Information Age. We could have gold and silver and platinum circulating as currency in ordinary daily transaction (Goldmoney). We do not need these archaic devices anymore. And it may take some creative destruction for that to happen. But I think that the market will pull through because there are more efficient ways of handling our currency in our ordinary day to day transactions.

BNN HOST: So as we get more and more concerned with the top of that pyramid, the derivatives play, you are talking about $1,300 bullion. How do you get to that figure?

TRACE: $1,300 bullion comes from looking at the 200 hundred day moving averages and where gold has consolidated and where it goes based on the usual uplegs.  It looks like we are following the same thing that happened in 2004 with the rise in 2005, the consolidation in 2006, which went to the rise in 2007, and the consolidation in 2008, and it looks that it will lead to a similar rise in 2009 and 2010 which will take gold to $1,300 which should be a little bit above its 200 day moving average. But in the same trading ranges as we saw in 2005 and 2007.

BNN HOST: We have a 10 year chart on the screen but you look back even five or seven years ago; more so I suppose take it back 10 – 20 years. Looking at gold on an inflation adjusted basis and gold is dirt cheap by comparison.

TRACE: Yes. The reason for that, we hit on it earlier, was Alan Greenspan testified twice before Congress “that central banks stand ready to lease gold should the price rise.” And the reason that central banks leased gold since early 1995 and onward, and actually before that they were in the market, is to keep the interest rates suppressed.  So we have had this inflation in the system and the consequences have been masked by the central bank gold leasing. But it seems that the central banks are now losing control over their physical bullion, the market is asserting itself and we are seeing this rise in price as a result. Because when you own gold in effect you are fighting every central bank in the world.

BNN HOST: Are we also not fighting the U.S Dollar. What is your expectations Trace for the green back?

TRACE: That is a very excellent question. The dollar is the world reserve currency but as Alan Greenspan and said, “This rise in the gold price is the first real step towards a move away from fiat currency.  And so we do not know how long it will take but the dollar has tremendous problems. And now it has appeared to become the carry-trade currency.  So we are seeing a lot of people sell the dollar to fund purchases and buy other assets and that puts further selling weakness on the dollar.

BNN HOST: Trace, we appreciate…

TRACE: And will probably persist for a long time just like the Japanese Yen.

BNN HOST: Well, we are going leave it there. Thank you so much for your insights and all the best to the Columbus Day Long Weekend.

TRACE: Oh. Thank you.

BNN HOST: Trace Mayer, Financial Blogger and Author of The Great Credit Contraction.

DISCLOSURES:  Long physical gold, silver and platinum with no position in the problematic GLD or SLV ETFs.