Complete Intelligence

Categories
Week Ahead

The Fed, equities, and geopolitics Iran acting out and Red Sea

The Fed, equities, and geopolitics Iran acting out and Red Sea

https://youtu.be/t-DkDxpAKtY

Access AI-powered markets forecasts for free with CI Markets Free. Sign up here: https://completeintel.com/markets

Welcome to the latest episode of “The Week Ahead” with your host, Tony Nash! We’ve assembled a stellar lineup featuring Tavi Costa, Albert Marko, and Tracy Shuchart.

📈 Tavi on The Fed, Inflation, and Geopolitics: Tavi takes the lead, unraveling the intricacies of the US stock market’s divergence from emerging markets. Get ready for a deep dive into the impact of inflation on earnings and a critical look at the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy. Tavi also shares insights on commodity prices, injecting a touch of sarcasm on the potential actions of the Fed.

💥 Albert on Iran’s Aggressive Moves: Albert steps up to discuss Iran’s recent bold actions, including attacks in Pakistan, Syria, and Iraq. Explore the motivations behind Iran’s sudden assertiveness and the potential outcomes of these strategic moves.

🌊 Tracy on Red Sea Issues: Tracy guides us through the complexities of Red Sea issues, examining the stability of crude prices and potential triggers for a spike. Dive into the impact on the shipping industry, including insurers’ adjustments and airfreight companies considering alternative routes.

Experience the power of AI in forecasting Markets. Subscribe to CI Markets Free: https://completeintel.com/markets

Transcript

Tony Nash

We’re joined by Tavi Kosta, Albert Marko and Tracy Shuchart. We’ve got a few key themes. The first, Tavi is going to talk to us about the Fed equity outlook in geopolitics. Albert’s going to talk to us about Iran. They’ve had some cross border skirmishes, and we’re trying to figure out if Iran is acting out. And then Tracy’s going to talk to us about the Red Sea. Why aren’t crude prices moving? What’s happening with freight supply chains and all that stuff?

Tony Nash

Before we get started, I want to let you know about a new free tier we have within CI Markets, our global market forecasting platform. We want to share the power of CI Markets with everyone. So we’ve made a few things for you. First, economics. We share all of our global economics forecasts for the top 50 economies. We also share our major currency forecasts as well as Nikkei 100 stocks. So you can get a look at what do our stock forecasts look like? There is no credit card required. You can just sign up on our website and get started right away. So check it out. CI Markets Free. Look at the link below and get started ASAP. Thank you.

Tony Nash

So, Tavi, thank you so much for joining us today. I know you’re in Brazil and it’s really not easy to coordinate schedules with you. So thanks again. Really appreciate this. I want to look at one of the tweets that you put out earlier this week looking at the Fed fighting inflation. And in this you talk about three inflationary waves of the 1970s. And I’d really like to kind of understand the context, kind of what do you think that means for the situation that we’re in now and how do we handle this going forward?

A screenshot of a graph

Description automatically generated

Tavi Kosta

Well, first, thanks for having me again. Well, I think there’s a lot of importance of analyzing what’s happening with inflation because of the behavior in markets that we may see unfolding due to those changes. It is of my view that 2021 and 2020 marked a significant change in the investment cycle. And I believe we’re now seeing structural forces in the inflation front that will mark the different regime in terms of cost of capital, in terms of cost of debt, in terms of even how we value assets. And so those structural forces to me are relevant. Number one is what we call the pillars of inflation. Those are, deglobalization comes first. I mean, that’s probably the most important one. I think a lot of analysts and Wall street in general is seeing some of those. Let’s see the Red Sea events and some others as kind of isolated events, and they’re not. I believe they are all interconnected in a big way. We’ve seen some of those big changes today in terms of even geopolitical problems relative to countries that we haven’t seen in decades now starting to become more problematic. That’s one of them. And we’re seeing the reshoring of developed economies and others that are causing the demand for commodities.

Tavi Kosta

And not only that, but also the reliance of the Chinese economy and other authoritarian regimes is being reduced in a big way. The second, I think, pillar of inflation has to do with what government developed economists have been doing, which is the reckless amount of fiscal spending. I mean, even if we look back in the 1970s, we certainly didn’t see this level of government spending and support that we’re seeing. And even if you exclude things like interest payments and other entitlement payments and so forth, there’s still a really significant portion of the spending that is very inflationary. Number three would be what’s happening as well with the labor markets. Labor markets for the first time that I can recall since the 70s probably, we’re seeing finally the cost of living being so high that it’s causing folks to actually demand higher wages and salaries. And that’s just something that evolves over time. And as we’ve seen, one aspect of this that there is room to grow is the fact that a lot of corporations are still paying their employees some of their lowest portions in terms of employee compensation relative to profits we’ve seen in history.

Tavi Kosta

And so there’s certainly room for not only protests and other issues heating up here that will become more and more widespread. And then I would point out to one thing that has been to me a main focus, which is the chronic under investments in natural resource industries that we, I think Tracy also covers that very well. And it’s related to the fact that supply of commodities and natural resources, those industries have been neglected for so many years now, if not decades. And that is creating a problem with especially the corporations and management of those firms being extremely conservative at not creating new projects and new developments of mines and other projects and other resources. That is creating also the limited supply of those things moving forward. And so if you ask me, I think this is the beginning of a hard assets environment where you want to be invested in resource rich economies and resource rich even companies that produce those assets over time too.

Tony Nash

Okay, so there’s really a lot to pull apart there. But just looking at your last bit. So first of all, you really validated a lot of what Albert’s been saying for the past couple of years and a lot of what Tracy’s been saying for the past couple years. And what I’m hearing you say is the Fed may be saying that we’ve conquered inflation, but we actually haven’t. There’s more to come. So when you talk about investing in resource rich economies, you recently talked about us stock market valuations versus the rest of the world, especially emerging markets. So what are the factors behind the divergence in those markets? And what of those markets that are, say, underrepresented? What’s appealing about those markets?

A screenshot of a social media post

Tavi Kosta

Well, first of all, I think there are some decades resource businesses are usually terrible companies, especially in the mining space where I, and most of those companies make no money. They’re very capital intensive and they’re highly dilutive. They burn a lot of capital. But there are some specific decades that are very interesting to own them, and they usually are linked to inflationary decades. So if you looked back in the 1910s, the all those three decades actually coincided with periods where inflation was running hotter than usual. And so, yes, you see the operational costs and other things rising at those periods, but the hard assets overall tend to really outperform even the cost structure, but also other assets like financial assets overall. And so that is one very important aspect. And the other thing has to do with why they have been neglected for so many years to not only. Well, they’re not really growth companies, and that has been one part of the market has probably attracted most of the capital we’ve seen in the last decade or so. Technology has been a big portion of. Well, and that has to do with, I think with the cost of debt being so cheap, allowing investors to not focus in bottom lines and profitability.

Tavi Kosta

I think somebody, maybe David Einhorn, made a point about we should measure how many, the frequency of analysts actually listening to earnings calls nowadays. I mean, you’ve probably seen, there’s a good chart of CFA level two people. The volume of those have been drastically declining. It’s just another way of seeing how fundamental analysis is just over. I mean, no one really does that. And I am of the view that we’re going to go back to that. We see decades that are like that and the same will go for mining. So why do I think those things look appealing? Because historically, when those companies start being extremely conservative, that’s the time you want to start getting exposure to it. And there are many ways you can measure that. My favorite one is looking to aggregate capex, and you can see that across not only the overall commodity space of producers, but also specifically in different parts of the commodity industries like agricultural commodities, energy, or you can look into the mining space and even break down into the metals as well. And what you’re going to find is that, yeah, overall, most of those companies have been extremely conservative, and it’s just hard to believe that that’s not going to drive the prices of things in general moving a lot higher.

Tavi Kosta

And I’ll point out to one more thing that I think is very relevant. I am of the view that gold is going to make new highs. And not only that, but we enter a new cycle and we can get into the reasons for that. But I’ve never seen a gold cycle that doesn’t coincide with a commodity cycle. And so to me that’s really what it comes down to. It’s just another way of betting on the idea that precious metals will enter a cycle. And if that happens, we’re probably going to see other commodities follow along.

Tony Nash

Okay, let’s talk about that, because I want to understand your gold thesis. Can you tell us why you think gold is going to run up?

Tavi Kosta

Well, I think there’s two pools of capital that really move the markets in general. There’s the 60 40 portfolios, the pension funds and all those kind of more idealistic investment strategies. And then you have the other side of it, which is central banks. And those are very relevant. And we have to understand where are those guys allocated and where they’re likely to move towards. So let’s separate the two. One of them is what is called the 60 40 portfolios. I mean, that has been the most successful way to be invested probably in the last 20 years or so and maybe 30 years. But now with this new investment cycle, I believe we’re entering where we’re seeing changes of correlations and so forth. I think we’re going to start favoring other assets. And to me this is the first time in 45 years that the downside volatility of gold versus treasuries is actually in a way where gold is less volatile than treasuries. And so I would think that those funds running those types of analysis will start favoring gold as at least a portion of that 40% of their portfolio in safe havens. And so it starts seeing that moving from zero to five to percent ten on the gold side.

Tavi Kosta

I think that would be a very significant and meaningful dynamic of flows into the space. The second one is central banks. Well, central banks, if you look at the history of them, the way you do it, at least the way I do it, is looking at their assets and the composition of their assets throughout history. And you can go back all the way to the 70s or even further, but what you find is that gold used to be a really big portion of their balance sheet assets in the past. And to be more specific, back in the late 70s, after the gold standard ended, we actually went to a period where central banks were accumulating gold, believe it or not, and their central bank assets actually peaked at the end of the beginning of the about 74% of their international reserves. So central banks have different priorities. They own things not because of a risk perspective. They own things because they want to create stability to their monetary systems. And so they need something credible. And so since then, treasuries and other sovereign institutions or sovereign instruments got really cheap, and so they accumulated those assets it makes sense.

Tavi Kosta

So on the back of that we had the success of six to 40 portfolios, the declining of interest rates, the improvement of growth stocks. And so everything is kind of linked to that significant change. And so now we’re starting to see the beginning of purchases of central banks. And you may say, wow, that’s pretty significant. Those are record amounts of purchases. But what is really significant is the fact that they are just 20% of their central bank assets today in gold allocation. So what if we go back to the median, which is about 40%, which is double from where we are today, and I think that’s very plausible. So coming from those two parts of the market, I would say that that can be a very important segment, or I should say attraction of capital to this industry. And not to go on a lot further, but there’s more to this. But I’ll keep it short.

Tony Nash

It’s a great overview. Just a quick question about gold and Albert and Tracy. I want to bring you guys in in a second, but I feel like there’s, on some level, at least from retail, there’s almost a substitutional factor between, say, gold and crypto. Crypto was kind of used as that counter dollar Deval asset. And now that we have crypto or say bitcoin spot funds coming out, that sort of thing, will that take away from the gold market as kind of a counter dollar deval, say asset for retail to hold? I know you were just talking about central banks, but I’m talking kind of that marginal, say retail or portfolio investor, will they see the crypto or bitcoin ETFs as a substitute to gold?

Tavi Kosta

Look, I think the reason for the gold being so unfavorable across the retail investors has been the fact that it just hasn’t performed very well. And a lot of people like to just ignore the metal because of that factor. When to me, as a contrarian, I love that factor. It’s exactly why I don’t go to a restaurant or a bar and I talk to a person and they’re telling me they’re buying claims of properties looking for gold and silver and copper. No, they talk about crypto assets and other things. And so to me, it’s a totally a contrarian opinion. I think there’s no marketing that is better than making money. And the fact that we haven’t made a lot of money in gold certainly is unfortunately a negative situation. And so do I think that will change? Yes, I do think that will change. I don’t think you’re going to get rich buying gold. I’m never going to say that. But I think there is a symmetry to buying assets that are linked to gold that are likely to be performing way better than the metal itself. That to me is what is very attractive about the space.

Tavi Kosta

And as we see people actually being successful and making every gold cycle, there’s a new period of new billionaires and successful investors that emerge. And I’m trying to be one of them. And that’s certainly my goal. And I think there’s a lot of other people creating credible vehicles that will do the same. And I think that that will attract the capital from the retail. You know, the fact that retail is not very interested to me is actually probably a positive factor instead. But

Tony Nash

Interesting.

Tavi Kosta

Yeah.

Tony Nash

Tracy, you follow precious metals and miners. What’s your thought on gold appreciation?

Tracy Shuchart

I think the bigger question here, just kind of jumping on to your question on the bitcoin gold thing. I think the bigger question here is do we think that these bitcoin ETFs are going to hurt or help the underlying asset? I think that’s a more interesting question than does the bitcoin trade hurt or help the gold trade, in my opinion.

Tony Nash

And I guess for me, a bigger question regarding related central banks is CBDC versus gold. Is that something that offsets the underlying value of gold? I mean, I don’t know how realistic that is for, say, the Fed, but obviously it’s a discussion point and I’m just not sure about it because I really don’t know. Albert, what are your thoughts on gold?

Albert Marko

What are my thoughts on gold? If we’re talking about trading it in a range between 1700 and 2300, I would absolutely agree.

Albert Marko

You should have it in your portfolio and diversify. Hoping that it goes to three, four, five, 6000 is just pure lunacy in my world, right. I’ve been told from treasury secretaries that they’re going to cap it at 3000. They’ll never let it because it affects the US dollar. When you’re sitting there trying to fight someone like the Fed or the treasury, especially in a commodity like gold, you’re never going to win.

Tony Nash

Right.

Albert Marko

But like I said, he’s right. Gold sitting there at 1718 1900. Why would you not have your portfolio allocated in an asset? Which is clear that for whatever reason the central banks are know buying gold for their portfolio, they’re clearly doing. It’s whether as Tavi was saying, or whether I believe, because it’s arbitrage for dollars in the long run. So doesn’t matter which argument you make, they’re certainly doing it right. So onto the other point about investing in commodity rich countries. Absolutely. We’re in a cycle where commodities are becoming much more hard to get. The supply chain disruptions are problematic. The only concern I have is when you start investing in those countries, you really have to look at the politics behind who’s leading those countries, because some of them are left leaning, some of them are right leaning. The left leaning countries tend to favor climate change and environmental policies that sometimes is contrary to mining and whatnot. So that’s the only tidbit I’d throw in there with that.

Tony Nash

Yeah, that was actually my next question to Tavi is if we look at that chart that he has on kind of the premiums across stock markets, the market value to GDP and more of those countries that you look on the right. My question is around geopolitical risk. How do you factor geopolitical risk into investing in these countries, not just those that have precious metal mining, but also the ones that are on the right that aren’t necessarily hit the valuations, that haven’t necessarily hit the valuations that are, say, a median valuation.

Tavi Kosta

Well, it’s an important question because the risk is not taking away of the trade at all. As we know, markets will prioritize different things at different times. And right now, certainly the risk of the political side has been, I think, the largest thing that has been causing this big difference in valuations of companies in the mining space specifically because I can speak a little better about that. Know, one thing that you can see today is the fact that if you buy, let’s just say a project and mining project in Peru versus in Canada, you’re going to pay a much higher premium in Canada. For obvious reasons. But the thing is, because of ESG issues and other things, for you to put that project into production in Canada will take you 15 years, while you can do that in Peru. Depending on the project, depending on the situation, you can maybe get that into production in three years. And so I’m not joking. I mean, we have a project in Bolivia now that is actually going to get into production hopefully in about three years. And government has been very supportive. Why? Because they know they need people to be employed, so they want the projects to go ahead.

Tavi Kosta

And so when do we start actually shifting the prioritization from markets, giving a premium to the political jurisdiction rather than maybe the speed of getting a project into production? I think that we’re going to see some of that shift. I personally think that that’s going to be an important one because I want to own more projects that will actually get into production in this cycle, not the next one. Because buying an exploration project, you only going to get into production in 15 years from now. So why even bother? So that to me is an important aspect.

Tony Nash

Interesting.

Albert Marko

That’s really difficult to do. I commend you on that one, especially trying to find something that’s going to be productive in the next two, three, four years. That’s tough.

Tavi Kosta

Yeah, it all depends on the idea, right. This project I’m talking about has infrastructure already ready to go. They spent over $2 billion in infrastructure and found a discovery. And the discovery now is the big discussion, can we get this discovery into production? And so you need permits, you need all sorts of things. You need to build some infrastructure there as well because it’s 40 km away. And if you’re trying to do that in Canada, boy, good luck. It’s going to take you a while to get those permits and approvals and you got to talk to the natives and all those things in Bolivia, you might be able to get there much quicker, especially if you don’t have to build a lot of infrastructure. So this is a very specific case that I’m talking about, but that certainly is one to consider. There are other projects like the ones we’re looking at that are in similar positions.

Tony Nash

Yeah, you have to be hyper aware of the politics on the ground in these cases. Right. So I don’t think we can underscore enough the importance of geopolitics, especially in the environment of higher interest rates. Right. When that cost of capital rises, the downside of geopolitical risk is much more painful. So let’s switch to us equities for a minute. Tavi, given where us stock valuations are. What’s your outlook on earnings? We saw massive earnings growth with inflation in 2021, especially in early 2022. As inflation grew, so did margins for companies because they could push stuff onto their customers. With inflation abating, where do you see earnings coming from? Are we at the point in the cycle where earnings growth comes from cost and staff cuts? Does that stuff become the focus?

A screenshot of a graph

Description automatically generated

Tavi Kosta

Boy, if that happens, I don’t know how the population will keep moving because the widespread labor strikes to me are a big portion of all this. And I’m going to start actually putting out some stats on this because I don’t think people are doing enough. The point of how much corporations are getting paid relative to how much the labor market is getting their share. And so that’s going to change. I think that’s going to create an even more inflationary problem. But to your question, look, I’m not of the view that we’re going to see a soft lending. I’ve been of the view. I’m not going to say. I think most of the managers that are writing 2022 that absolutely nailed 2022 had issues in 2023, and the same guys that nailed 2023 had a terrible 2022. And so who do you know that did well in 2022 and 2023? I mean, that’s very rare to see because most people fall into one of the two categories. They’re either inflationary or deflationary. And you can strapolate those moving forward. The deflationary likes technology and some other things, and the others like value stocks and commodities and other things like that, I’ve been of the view that this profusion of macro indicators suggesting that we’re going to see a recession will eventually happen.

Tavi Kosta

And when I say eventually, I think six months, twelve months is probably very plausible. I think it’s going to happen. And so if I’m of the view of that, and I don’t think there’s a lot of big themes in the short side that look attractive. I mean, the dominance of mega cap companies, is that something that will continue? I don’t think so. I highly doubt we’re going to see that this entire year. I think that that’s going to be fading. There are issues with companies maturing debt in 2024 and they have to reissue that debt, along with the government that has $8.2 trillion of debt, has to be reissued. What’s the resolution of all that? We all know the average interest rate right now is 3%, but interest rates itself is at what? I don’t know. Interest rates are below four. The majority of them are above four or 4%. So talking about that, it’s going to be a big change in interest payments and margins that will get squeezed. And then you extrapolate that in corporations it could be even worse. And so yield curve inversions, deeply inverted. Now steepening. Well, how many times have we seen that in the past?

Tavi Kosta

So I’m not the one who is going to bet against history. And maybe history is wrong and all these indicators are wrong and we don’t even see a lending, maybe we’re going to see actually a booming economy. And I’m completely off here, but I think there’s. Yeah.

Tony Nash

All of these things sound like headwinds for earnings. Do we see a return to earnings growth in 24 or do we see flat earnings for the next several quarters? Because I’m just not sure where that earnings growth comes from. Albert, what do you think on that?

Albert Marko

I don’t know why it matters. I mean, they’re using seven stocks to pump the market in bonds. What does it matter? I mean, I agree with them to a point. Things don’t look really that great historically. You’re looking at most likely a recession. I just don’t buy the recession talk for 2024 for only one reason, is there’s an election in the US for that reason alone, and they’re willing, and they’ve shown that they’re willing to pump money into the economy, into the markets. They’ve done it multiple times in the past. And from what Yellen’s actions are, I don’t see it stopping now. Twelve months from now, completely different story. That’s a completely different era. And the situation changes after that. But for the next six months.

Albert Marko

I think they’ll probably launch the market close to 5000 or 5300 or something stupid.

Tony Nash

Tavi, what do you think?

Tavi Kosta

Can I ask a question?

Tony Nash

Go ahead.

Tavi Kosta

I find an interesting point because I thought about that too. I mean, this is an election year and so forth, and the Fed to me was a total political shift. What happened recently, I can’t explain. Well, what exactly happened when inflation is where it is right now and anyways, and it’s decelerating and there’s no point there. But the year of 2000, the year 2008 was also, both of them were peak of the market in eight was a very terrible market. Both were election years. How do we put so much weight on the fact that it is an election year when history shows that actually there were some really brutal years during election?

Albert Marko

There’s a key difference, though. Back then, China and the Europeans were not complete zombies like they are today. They’re dead right now. So all that money, all the inflow coming into the US markets is helping, is helping the US stock exchange. There’s no question about that. Flies into bonds, it flies into the equities. It goes everywhere. There’s no one right now to hold us accountable of what misdeeds we’re doing. Back then, you could have said, okay, well, I’m going to take my 30% or 40% of my portfolio and put it into China, or I’m going to put it into the European economy. Can’t do that right now. That’s one of my main contentions is that part alone, it really stops any kind of argument. It’s like, okay, well, then where’s the money going to go at this point? Who’s going to stop the political actions of Janet Yellen from this point on?

Tony Nash

That’s fair. And if we look at Tavi’s chart from earlier, a lot of those European countries are relatively overvalued as well. Right? So if you want to stay relatively safe, do you want to put it in Europe? Well, it looks overvalued. Do you want to put it in Japan? Well, you have the currency risk and you have, according to Tavi’s chart, overvalued. Right.

Tony Nash

So I think it’s a good point.

Albert Marko

You also have a very politicized Fed and treasury at the moment. Obviously, like Michael Green was saying the other day, the treasury secretary is an appointee of the president and pushes aims. No question about that. But the other thing is, a lot of fed members were ousted last year for more liberal minded MMT in the frame of Lael Brainard’s MMT type economy. Right. So this is why I think that this is a new regime. They don’t care what happens in a year.

Albert Marko

They think they have full control, which I completely agree with Tabi, historically, you can see that that doesn’t really play out very well in the long run, but because of, there’s nowhere else for money to, right, And they have almost full control politically at the moment. I just can’t see them allowing a recession to happen only for political optics. Sure, the data can say this and that in a few sectors and whatnot, but they manipulate the BLS, they manipulate the CPI numbers. So for me, they can do whatever they want and they’ll make some kind of chart to make it look like we’re not in a recession, even though 90% of America is already in a recession as it is.

Tony Nash

Tavi, what do you think about that?

Tavi Kosta

Well, I think I’m happy to be wrong on the recession call if that means precious metals and other hard assets will do much better because the Fed and other institutions are stimulating the economy just because of elections. That would be good for copper, that would be good for zinc, that would be good for a lot of things.

Albert Marko

100% because they’ll lower the dollar to help the market up. If they lower the dollar, God knows what commodities are going to do.

Tony Nash

Yeah, and I think you guys are kind of saying the same thing. You’re saying you don’t expect a recession in 24 and you’re both saying maybe in twelve months this stuff happens. And I think at least we’re in.

Albert Marko

A different timing issue, whether it’s six months, twelve months, 18 months, that’s all it is because we’re on the same wavelength that commodities are the definite to play here.

Tavi Kosta

The beauty of starting the year, sorry to interrupt, but the beauty of starting the year is that you can see all these calls for 2024. And if you think about that chart, the very first chart that you’re referring to that shows the waves of inflation that I think it’s a critical chart to think about. One of the things that is overwhelmingly the consensus view right now is that inflation is over, that it will decelerate. Just look at the two year yields and what’s been happening with the rate cuts price in, in the markets right now. Most of those things, I think, reflect maybe some sort of recession play as well. But the recession thing, the thing is, the recession thing is from a sentiment standpoint, it’s not as attractive as the inflation reacceleration. The inflation reacceleration to me looks much more of a play because there’s room for that, for people to have that view. Right. It’s 100 people that have the opinion.

Albert Marko

Yeah, completely agree with that. That is much more better of a play than it is to play with recession, which is way more political right now. But the secondary inflation wave absolutely is a great play right now.

Tony Nash

Tracy, what do you see there in the secondary inflation?

Tracy Shuchart

Well, absolutely. I’ve been very vocal over the last month, actually starting in December, late December, that I thought this problem in the Red Sea was going to lead to a bigger disaster than everybody thought that it would. And it’s played out pretty much as I predicted. And I think that right now we’re not seeing these effects in the numbers yet as far as extra fuel consumption, extra insurance rates, extra.

Tracy Shuchart

Let’s not get into too much of Red Sea stuff now. I don’t want to spoil the third, but. So you’re saying Red Sea will be a driver of a secondary wave of inflation?

Tracy Shuchart

Absolutely. And I think that hasn’t shown up at the data yet, but it will a few months down the road. And this could be a very big problem, not only for the election, for the government, but also for central banks.

Tony Nash

Right.

Tavi Kosta

Tracy, can I ask two questions to you, if you don’t mind? Tony? Just I think critical here, and it’s not Red Sea related, but one of them is how much do you think is sustainable, this increase of energy, or should say oil production in the US specifically? And the second question is how much of a war premium is currently priced in, in oil prices today?

Tracy Shuchart

I think.

Tavi Kosta

Two different questions.

Tracy Shuchart

Well, I’ll do the easiest one first. There is no war of premium price in, well, prices right now. Nobody is expecting it. And that’s partly in the fact that we’re not seeing hooties lob missiles at Aramico facilities anymore. And so if that should happen, which I do not think it would happen, that obviously would be driver for oil prices to move higher. So I don’t think that geopolitical risk is factored into the market right now. The market’s pretty, being pretty relaxed about it because really no oil facilities end or no oil production has been hurt at this point, even though we are finally starting to see tankers avoid the Red Sea. But that’s kind of a new development. And then the first question was, what was the first question?

Tavi Kosta

Oil production in the US.

Tracy Shuchart

Absolutely. I think that oil production in the US, I think. Can you cut out that part until I say oil production in the US? Oil production in the US. Let me start over terrible today. And to answer to your first question, I think oil production in the US is set to slow. I think expectations are very high. I think that 2023 came as a surprise to most markets because even though we had declining ducks and we had declining rig counts, oil production continued to move higher. But what we are getting from the. So I think this is a two part thing. I think, one, what we’re getting from these wells is getting gassier and gassier. That means lighter and lighter. That means stock. That is really, you can only use for chemical production, petrochemicals and things of that nature. That’s what kind of, we’re kind of getting out. And what I think that we also saw is that with this wave of consolidation in the industry and we’re seeing all the big majors start to suck up all these smaller companies. What they’re doing is they’re sucking up production. So what we saw is these smaller companies try to produce as much as they can to look as attractive as they can for an acquisition, and as a result, we’re seeing some major big deals over the last year, and it’s expected to continue. That trend is expected to continue within 2024. And so that’s kind of what I mean by all these majors are not expected to grow production. None of them are saying we want to grow production in the US. They’re buying production growth, if that makes sense at all. I think that is part of the reason that oil production continued to rise in 2023, much to most people’s surprises, because we have these smaller companies really trying to produce as much as they possibly could to be attracted to these majors.

Tony Nash

Yeah, I mean, if these guys are disincentivized for doing capital investment, then of course they just have to buy the assets that are already developed. Right? The smaller assets. I mean, it’s a way of backing into it instead of doing it greenfield. As they’ve done in decades before. So in hindsight, it looks natural, but looking forward, it would have been kind of a hard thing to expect that thing.

Tracy Shuchart

Absolutely.

Tony Nash

I think. Okay, great. This has been fantastic, Tavi. I’m going to move on to some geopolitical issues with Albert.

Tony Nash

Hey, I’d like to make sure you know that you can access our AI driven market forecasting tool called CI Markets for free. No streams attached, and it does not require any credit card information. Go to completeintel.com/markets to subscribe. CI Markets is the perfect addition to your analysis toolbox. This free account includes Nikkei stocks, major currency pairs, and global economics. Of course, we offer much more in our paid account, but this lets you experience CI markets before making a financial commitment. CI Markets uses the power of AI to help you make better trading investment decisions. It’s absolutely free. Again, go to completeintel.com/markets to subscribe to CI Markets free.

Tony Nash

Albert, we saw on Tuesday, we saw that Iran launched some attacks against Pakistan.

Tony Nash

Pakistan retaliated midweek. Earlier in the week, Iran launched attacks against Syria and Iraq. So what’s happening here? Why is Iran suddenly acting so aggressively? And what outcome do they know?

A group of people standing in front of a missile

Description automatically generated

Albert Marko

Honestly, it’s just theatrics, deception more than anything else. I mean, the Iranians didn’t actually attack Pakistan military installations themselves, right? And the Pakistanis also didn’t retaliate versus the IRGC directly themselves. They just threw some lobster missiles back and forth at some proxy militant organizations, nothing more. This is nothing more than hyping up the whole Houthi Red Sea issue to probably drive up oil prices at the be. There’s no threat of expanding regional war with the Pakistanis and the Iranians, which is absolutely absurd since both of them are within the sphere of influence of Moscow.

Tony Nash

And Beijing.

Albert Marko

Yeah, and Beijing to a lesser degree, though. I mean, the Beijing. Beijing is a trade partner, whereas the Soviets actually supply them with defense equipment and whatnot. Right. And advisors. And it’s a different dynamic. I would associate more influence on Moscow than I would in Beijing in this part of the. Yeah, you know, I don’t see much of anything coming of know.

Tony Nash

Zuran is kind of portrayed as kind of this puppet master in the Middle east of the Houthis and know, Syria and other places. Are they really?

Albert Marko

Well, yeah, they are. I mean, they supply arms, weapons, narcotics, trade through multiple areas of the world through the Middle east. And they fund a lot of the proxies and operations out of there. There’s no question that they’re definitely a player. Most of this is just testing the United States’ resolve, the west’s resolve in the region and to, you know, we’re don’t. To show the entire muslim world, hey, we’re know, don’t discount us. We’re not, you know, like I said, as some kind of grand scheme of undermining the entire west.

Tony Nash

I just don’t get it. I just don’t get kind of, especially this week’s tactical movements by Iran. Maybe it’s to prop up the oil price, but. I know this sounds kind of crazy, but would they coordinate that with Pakistan beforehand and say, hey, we’re going to take out these militants on your side and then you can take out these militants on our mean.

Albert Marko

Yeah, of course.

Tony Nash

In the west.

Albert Marko

You think they. Oh, yeah, of course. The IRGC and the ISI, I’m sure they have connections, you know, winking a nod. We’re going to throw missiles over here. Don’t be surprised. Yeah, we’ll respond with missiles over there. Don’t be surprised. Of course you’re going to have that communication. You’re not going to just do something surprise in the middle of the night because that can lead into a serious conflict.

Tony Nash

Okay, so there’s really nothing to see here.

Albert Marko

Not really.

Tony Nash

And we’ll get into the Red Sea in a minute. But that is really backed by Iran. That’s not really backed by Russia, is that.

Albert Marko

I mean, obviously, I’m sure the Russians would have some sort of notice about what’s going on over there, but realistically, it’s the IRGC of Iran that’s pushing the Houthis to do these sort of things. I mean, the Houthis get total funding from them, so they can’t just sit there and do something all willy-nilly without approval.

Tony Nash

Right. Okay, interesting. So that segues perfectly into Tracy’s red Sea segment, and both you guys jump in here as needed. But Tracy, you know, we’ve all seen what’s happening with the Red Sea and the Houthis and the US kind of bomb strikes and all this. You know, crude prices really haven’t budged since mid December. So why we saw European gas prices plummet this week. Why have they not budged? And what would make them spike at this point?

A graph on a screen

Description automatically generated

Tracy Shuchart

Well, I think as far, and I’ve been saying this for a week now, weeks now, this is a shipping and insurance issue. So if you were invested in container ships at the start of this, you did really well. They’re starting to back off now, but they spiked this. Oil prices did nothing. Natural gas prices did nothing. Globally, we’re oversupplied on LNG and natural gas. I don’t expect that to subside anytime soon. As far as a long term investment prospect, I think that some of these individual companies are attractive. But as far as actual futures markets, net gas is just not attractive right now. And then if we look at oil prices again, the Houthis aren’t lobbying missiles again at Aramco facilities as they once did. That spiked oil price at $7 in a day. Right. And tankers until the last week or so have been largely unaffected and have been able to traverse the Red Sea with no problem at all. And you have to understand, because Iran has ships traversing the Red Sea in oil products as well, the Saudis are staying out of this for the most part. They’re not getting involved, which means there’s not that tension between the Houthis and Saudis right now and the Emiratis. So there’s not that threat that they’re going to be lobbying this little city. So there’s oil facilities. And so I think that’s why oil has been largely ignoring this right now because there really hasn’t been a direct threat at this point.

Tony Nash

It’s really notable to me that the Saudis and the Emirates have been really quiet on this. I think it’s really fascinating, especially given that the Saudis and the Emirates were involved in Yemen for so long for over a, I mean, there’s a story, because there’s not a story there, there’s just something going on, right.

Tracy Shuchart

No, I agree, absolutely.

Albert Marko

Yeah, this is, this is what we’ve been saying, Tony. Listen, I’ll be the first one to throw up the flags, the red flags, and say, hey, there’s a real conflict happening right now. But I mean, the Saudis just completely dismissed it, right? They don’t want to get involved. The US is going to. I mean, they had to act because of the shipping lanes and whatnot. But nobody else is really taking this seriously. Listen, this was a serious problem. Oil would be at $95 right now without question. And because the market hasn’t moved on it, I don’t think anybody’s taking this seriously.

Tony Nash

Well, you’re not even seeing brentured or Dubai or any of those grades spike up.

Albert Marko

No.

Tony Nash

Nothing consumed in Europe, right?

Albert Marko

Nothing.

Tony Nash

No action in WTI. That’s not a surprise. But you’re not seeing spikes in brentured or any of the Dubai grades or anything like that. I mean, it just doesn’t really make that much sense to me given the geopolitical aspects.

Tracy Shuchart

I feel like. Can I just say, I think there’s.

Tony Nash

Absolutely. Yeah.

Tracy Shuchart

I think there’s probably some backdoor deal where the IRGC, Saudi Arabia, basically they said, you know what, we’re not going to hurt your tankers. Don’t worry about it. Everything’s going to be know. I think there’s some political backdoor deals and why. Perhaps we’ve seen the Saudis and the Emirates kind of quiet about it because I’m sure that there was a lot discussed regarding oil when this first happened and why it’s been mostly container ships again, I said up until this last week.

Tony Nash

Yeah, well, we did see that trip. I think it was the Iranian foreign minister to Riyadh about three or four weeks ago. So is a backdoor deal plausible? Yeah, it’s plausible. It’s definitely something that could be in the works or having been agreed already. Tracy, you mentioned insurers, and we saw insurers adjust Red Sea rates weeks ago, but we’re now seeing exclusions for us and UK vessels. What does that mean? 

Tracy Shuchart

Well, you know, obviously that’s not good. They don’t want to touch us, UK vessels or anything. That’s going to Israel. That’s also going to be a very big problem for Israel, which is massively importing country. They don’t produce much except for some agricultural goods and some NatGas.

Tony Nash

But a lot of software.

Tracy Shuchart

Ans cyber security. That’s going to be a huge problem for Israel as far as getting good to their country. And it’s a very concerning problem for the US and the UK, which keep poking the bear know, I think that it just doesn’t look good. It’s not going to necessarily hurt the US because they can avoid the Red Sea. Merchant ships can avoid the Red Sea. That’s not really a look, it looks bad and it will be a problem for Israel getting goods to their country.

Tony Nash

Sure. Okay. So we’re also seeing air freight companies talking about goods potentially rerouting via air to avoid the Red Sea. And you tweeted about this earlier this week. So is that a real possibility or likelihood or is that just airline CEOs kind of pitching their business?

A screenshot of a social media post

Description automatically generated

Tracy Shuchart

Well, this was DHL. There was a DHL thing. And really, I think they were really talking about their container ships. But if I were to speculate, depending on how long this lasts and how much insurance rates go up and how long these and how big these shortages actually get on container shipping rates, I think you’re going to see air cargo do extremely well because you’re going to start diverting what would be on sea onto air eventually. But that, again, we’re not at that point yet, but it’s something to be looking forward to as this kind of drags on. We saw Maersk come out this week and said this is going to be months instead of weeks. And so the longer this drags on, the higher the wait times, the more know, container shortages you’re going to see, which we’re particularly seeing in Asia right now, which is bad news for, you know, I would kind of start looking at air power.

Tony Nash

So this plays really well into Tavi’s chart about the three waves of inflation. Right. So, Tavi, we’ve got geopolitical risk, we have potential supply chain risk and other things. So how do events like this kind of accelerate the kind of worldview that you have around those three waves of inflation?

A screenshot of a social media post

Description automatically generated

Tavi Kosta

Well, I think the three waves of inflation is really predicated. Again, it’s figuring out, or at least trying to identify are these forces, there’s always forces in the deflationary and inflationary side, and are they cyclical, structural? I would argue that they are certainly not what we saw in the, what we saw in the 40s. But majority of people, when I show that chart, they immediately say, well, this is not like the 1970s. And when you look back in the, we did see inflation developing through waves. In fact, I just haven’t showed this charts. But if you go to other economies, Germany, France and other Argentina, Turkey, and you look at their inflationary problems, they also develop through waves. And it’s just mathematical how things work. Things get really heat up and then on a year over year basis they decelerate. It doesn’t mean prices necessarily are contracting. They’re just accelerating the growth. And then you bottom at a certain level and you’re starting to see some signs of that. I still think CPI may fall a little more and I think it’s a total lagging indicator. You may see what’s the best way of trading this sort of my view, this overall potential for too much sentiment of further deceleration of inflation, and the problem is over.

Tavi Kosta

Well, it’s the fact that if you look at the commodity price, the equal weight of commodity prices, they’ve been on a range, trading on a range for about 18 months and they haven’t done much right, basically. They also haven’t done really bad either. They’ve been kind of going sideways for a while. And so what do I think it’s going to happen? Yeah, I think we’re going to retest the levels that we saw during that Russia invasion problem and probably going to go much higher than that at some point. And that’s what creates the second wave of inflation. So looking at the housing market is probably a huge factor here. I think there’s a reason why Warren Buffett owns home builders. I don’t blame him. I think there’s a total issue with housing inventories. Sorry, I got a notification on my phone. And I actually think that plays into the long term thesis of the inflation problem. I can’t imagine that building homes are not going to create a demand for commodities overall. The reshoring of economies won’t create demand for that. And this is all long term things that will at some point start driving the prices of those assets.

Tavi Kosta

And so knowing that the fact that the chronic issues in the commodity space have not been solved, I mean, access for capital is still the same situation. Over the last three years, especially in the mining space, things have been as distressed as they can be. Every company we own that is looking for capital now to raise, it’s all these difficulty of finding investors that are savvy enough that want to put capital into this. And so it’s really hard. And how do we build the next mines and the next supply of things in general? Well, we need capital and so all the capital is going into mega caps right now. Those things have to at some point translate into the markets. And I would think that the second wave of inflation could certainly happen this year. And I would say that it’s probably high conviction that we will.

Tony Nash

It’s just interesting to me that this started because of supply chain issues, a lack of supply, and then consumers have been conditioned to these higher rates.

Albert Marko

Well.

Tony Nash

This is higher.

Albert Marko

Well, this is the problem. Right. Tavi is right about pointing out the housing market. Right. It’s a political problem also because they need housing to be affordable and the only way to do that is to lower rates. Well, the moment you lower rates, you’re going to get next secondary inflation and the housing market go berserk. I guarantee you if they cut rates this year like half, like 50 basis points, that you’ll see housing market probably go up 15% to 20% immediately.

Tony Nash

Exactly right.

Tavi Kosta

And by the way, this is an issue I have with having such a bearish view overall, is because housing market is in a way an economy as well. So I’m not that bearish on the housing market personally. If you look back in the see the ratio of house prices versus the s and P, you’re going to find the house prices actually outperformed the s and p quite significantly during that decade. And if you go back to the was also the same thing. And the interesting aspect of this is, again, it’s a hard asset that outperforms a financial asset during an inflationary era. And do I think that could happen today? Yeah, I just don’t think that within the hard assets realm, housing looks very attractive relative to other things. But I wouldn’t bet against it. I think there’s better things to do.

Tony Nash

Interesting. Guys, thank you so much for this. I really appreciate your time. All that you’ve said today and have a great weekend and have a great week ahead. Thank you.

Albert Marko

Thanks, Tony.

Tavi Kosta

Thanks, Tony.

Categories
Audio and Podcasts

BFM 89.9 Market Watch: 2024 Is Still The Year For Tech

This podcast is originally produced and published by BFM 89.9 and can be found at https://www.bfm.my/podcast/morning-run/market-watch/2024-tech-stock-nvidia-amd-ai-equity-us-fed.

With CI Markets Free, our goal is to democratize financial insights. We believe that everyone should have access to powerful forecasting tools, enabling them to make informed decisions that align with their financial goals.

The podcast covers the impact of UK inflation on Wall Street and Asian markets, as well as the expectations for US equity markets. CEO Tony Nash provides insights on the US equity market, expecting incremental growth with volatility, and discusses the potential impact of the Fed’s rate decisions on equity markets. Furthermore, the discussion touches on the performance of companies like Charles Schwab and Verizon, highlighting challenges and anticipated financial results.

The segment also provides an overview of recent market performances and insights into the factors influencing equity markets, including the impact of UK inflation on global markets, expectations for US equity markets, and the financial outlook for specific companies.

Transcript:

BFM


Good morning at on Thursday the 18 January 2024. I’m Shazana Mokhtar with Wong Shou Ning and Keith Kam. In about half an hour we’re going to be discussing the market outlook for anti obesity medication, which has really taken the world by storm over the past couple of years. But as always, we’re going to kick start the morning with how global markets closed overnight.

BFM


Yeah, Wall Street saw its first, its third straight losing session overnight and that was because Europe was also down as UK inflation unexpectedly picked up. The Dow Jones was 0.3% lower, the S&P 500 was down 0.6%. The Nasdaq closed 0.6% lower. Earlier in the day was also quite a red day for Asia. Japan’s Nikkei was down 0.4%, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng was down 3.7%. Shanghai’s composite was down 2.1%. Singapore’s STI was down 1.3% and the FBMKLCI closed 0.2% lower at 1491 points. Like we don’t even remember that Monday was above 1500 anymore.

BFM


Well, it was a red day all across the board. For some insights on where international markets could be heading, we have on the line with us Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. Tony, good morning. Thanks for joining us. Now, roughly thirty S&P. Five hundred companies have reported fourth quarter results thus far with 78% beating expectations. Yet the equity market in general hasn’t been reacting as bullishly to those results as one might expect. I think all of the three major indices are down on a year to date basis. Why is that the case?

Tony Nash


Yeah, a big part of it is that, first of all, those expectations are much lower than they were a couple years ago, even last year. So those expectations that they’ve beat are pretty low. But in general, us equity markets are really priced for perfection. So if a company doesn’t come in with the perfect results, valuations are so stretched that investors kind of beat them down. Today in the US, we had retail sales numbers come out and the sales for December were very good, which could potentially build the case for a Fed higher for longer scenario, which goes against the Fed expectations for easing kind of as soon as possible that a lot of investors are really hoping for. So the retail sales numbers are really what it’s kind of good news is bad news in the US right now, because if there is good news for the economy, it means the Fed will not ease or is unlikely to ease. So when we look at valuations in the US, they’re very stretched. When we look at earnings in the US, earnings are below 5% on average. Expect to be below 5% on average, year on year earnings growth, that is.

Tony Nash


But when we look at earnings over the past few years, it’s really mirrored the inflation picture. And we’ve talked about this several times before where when there isn’t underlying inflation, then there isn’t a justification for companies to expand their margins. So if your underlying product, let’s say it’s steel, if steel inflation is say 10%, you as a steel manufacturer or whatever are going to add another couple of percent on top of that. Right? So everybody takes their cut. If we see a static or even deflationary environment, the ability for companies to grow their earnings is really low and it’s just a much more difficult environment for them. So what we’re looking at now, and not many people are willing to talk about this right now, but we’re about to enter a cost cutting cycle for companies because the ability to grow those earnings is really disappearing. So they’re going to have to cut costs to grow earnings.

BFM


Okay. I guess we’re seeing that in terms of the number of jobs eliminated, tech sector, financial sector, but that’s right. Tony, my question is, okay, if we assume that the Fed is really not going to be so aggressive with cutting rates, I think initially people were saying five, six times. I think the number’s been brought down to three and four times for this year. What does this then mean for equity markets? Because it’s likely that the US dollar will continue to remain strong, and we are seeing that now. So doesn’t the money still stay in us equities versus an outflow into emerging markets? Perhaps.

Tony Nash


Yes. So our expectation of Complete Intelligence is for incremental equity valuation growth on the broad index scale, okay, we have individual stock forecasts, but on the broad indices it’s incremental growth with a lot of intramonth volatility. So when we talk about incremental growth, that’s kind of small, positive movements month on month on average. Okay. But intramonth, we’re going to see a lot of up and down. Now with the Fed in terms of their raising interest rates, our sense is that it’s probably not going to happen until May or June. There are some people who are hopefully saying March, but we can’t continue to get readings like we’ve been getting in the macroeconomic data and expect the Fed to cut just because equity markets are pulling back doesn’t mean the Fed will cut. They don’t do that for equity markets. They do that for things like recession. They do that for things like deflation and so on.

BFM


Then again, Tony, we are looking at share prices of stocks linked to AI, like Nvidia and AMD. They are still soaring. Is tech, especially those related to AI, still going to be outperformers this year, no matter what happens politically or economically? And I was wondering how this ties into what you said just now about most companies going through a cost cutting cycle eventually.

Tony Nash


Yeah, I think we have those two opposing forces, right? So one is the corporate drive to improve profit. So that would tell you, hey, they’re probably cutting back on capital spending. The other one is kind of the seemingly endless hype about AI. And so obviously the hype about AI means underlying strength in chips. Okay? If companies are cost cutting, that likely means that individual companies are unlikely to build their own AI and ML machine learning platforms. They’re likely to outsource it to people like Microsoft or Amazon or something like that. So that would mean that those guys like Microsoft and Amazon would be buying more chips to power the AI that companies are going to use. So here in the US, I run an artificial intelligence company, and a lot of companies over the past couple years have tried to build their own artificial intelligence platforms. And that is just crazy because it’s like every company trying to build their own word processing software, right, when you just end up buying Microsoft Word or whatever. So we’re likely to see CTOs and CIOs come back to their senses and say, hey, we can’t build this stuff in house. We need to have someone outside do this.

Tony Nash


Now, when you look at Nvidia and AMD specifically, Nvidia is trading at, I think, 73 times earnings right now. So that means they have to make the current earnings for 73 years to justify their price. AMD is trading at 1423 times earnings, which is just crazy. So that tells me either AMD is going to have an incredible quarter next quarter or next year to recalibrate that valuation, or their share price is really in danger. I don’t actually know. I mean, we have our own forecasts on this stuff, but personally, I don’t know. But it seems to me that the AI hype cycle is maturing. We’re not having the rate of growth and hype that we had last year. That hype cycle is maturing. So are we going to see the rate of rise of individual share prices like we did last year? It’s going to be really hard to do that. So does that mean that we’re going to see a crash in these? It doesn’t necessarily have to be the case. They could just taper off or slow their growth rate.

BFM


Tony, thanks very much for speaking with us. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, giving us his take on some of the trends that he sees moving markets in the days and weeks ahead. A lot to look out for, I think, as earnings season continues to unfold. And let’s take a look at that, some of the earnings that have come out overnight, we’re beginning with Charles Schwab. They have reported fourth quarter profit that fell 47% to $1 billion on the back of bigger interest payments on its client deposits and debt, offsetting gains from increased asset management fees.

BFM


Net interest revenue fell 30% to about $2 billion. Charles Schwab, like major banks, are affected by the US Fed’s aggressive rate hikes. The brokerage paid an average of 1.4% on deposits, compared to 0.5% a year earlier. They also borrowed from the federal Home loan bank in the first half of 2023 to supplement its funding sources. And it paid an interest of $423,000,000 on those loans. That was four times higher than the year earlier. So it really, really adds up.

BFM


Okay, so this is the granddaddy of online trading. It emerged way back in the 2000s. But their CEO is basically saying they’ve never seen such difficult times. I think for them, it’s a confluence of factors. They, of course, were hit by the higher interest rates, so they had to pay much more for their deposits. Brokerage also came down as a result. New assets fell as much as 48%. So, basically, I think, tough times ahead for this company. And if you look at just the analysts, what are their recommendations for this stock? The current, they’re just, well, still. Okay, 19 buys five holes, two sells. Consensus target price for this stock, $74 at $0.65 during regular market hours. At one time, it was down 7%, but it did close just down eighty six cents to sixty three us dollars and forty five cents. But after this very negative earnings call, I won’t be surprised if many analysts go out and cut their numbers.

BFM


Well, speaking of negative earnings call, we’re not expecting Verizon’s fourth quarter results until next week, January 23. But perhaps they’re starting to manage expectations by issuing this statement that it will take a 6 billion US dollar write down in the fourth quarter as it reduces the value of its declining wireline business, which includes legacy voice and data services.

BFM


And this segment has been under particular pressure from strong competition, an uncertain economy and a broader shift to wireless services. The company cut its financial projections for its business unit, which caters to businesses and government clients after a five year review, and those account for more than a fifth of the company’s revenue.

BFM


Not very hot on Wall Street, 14 buys, 15 holes, four sells. Consensus target price for this job? $41.65. Current share price, $38.87. But, guys, this is fourth quarter, so I can imagine a lot of corporates doing as much kitchen sinking as possible and releasing as bad results as possible. It’s all about managing expectations. And then they can say, look, 2023 bad. Okay, never mind. We move on. Everyone just look to 2024.

BFM


All right? We’ll see what comes out of their earnings results next week. 718 in the morning, we’re going to head into some messages, but we’ll come back to cover more of the top stories in the newspapers and portals today. Stay tuned. BFM 89.9.

Categories
Videos

CNA: US Banking Giants Optimistic Amid Nasdaq Drop, Market Resilience in Question

The full episode was posted at https://www.channelnewsasia.com. It may be removed after a few weeks. This video segment is owned by CNA.

US banking giants express optimism for the year ahead despite warning of potential risks to the economic recovery. Sachs reports a 51% increase in earnings, driven by strong performance in asset and wealth management. However, Morgan Stanley’s net income falls over 30% due to charges, reflecting a mixed performance in the banking sector. The market sell-off is attributed to concerns about the resilience of US markets, potential volatility in the coming months, and uncertainty surrounding the upcoming presidential election and US fiscal spending.

Additionally, Wall Street is affected by the mixed reports from Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley weighing on market sentiment.

The show also discusses the upcoming reports from middle regional banks to gauge the performance of commercial lending, consumer activity, and the overall tone for corporate finance and insurance in the next quarter. Overall, market sentiment remains cautious due to uncertainties surrounding economic indicators, the upcoming election, and fiscal spending in the US.

✅ Create and forecast your own investment portfolios.
✅ 94.7% market forecast accuracy.
✅ 1,600+ assets forecasted every week.

Subscribe to CI Markets free. Learn more.

Transcript

CNA


US banking giants are finally calling the bottom, signaling a deal making comeback in the coming months. Executives of two major lenders expressed optimism for the year ahead as they reported fourth quarter earnings. But they also warned of risks that could disrupt the economic recovery. And Goldman Sachs stuck the landing after tumultuous year for the bank. Its earnings jumped 51% in the fourth quarter from a year ago. A strong performance from its asset and wealth management business supported the profit boost, offsetting weaker investment banking, and its shares ended up about seven tenths of a percent. Meantime, Morgan Stanley also topped revenue estimates on an investment banking rebound. But the net income fell more than 30% due to one of charges, pushing its shares lower by more than 4% there. Now it is the first scorecard under new CEO Ted pick, who warned of two major downside risks, including concerns around geopolitics and the health of the US economy. Those bank earnings results posing one of the biggest drags on Wall street, pushing all three major indices lower overnight. Now the S&P 500 had been trading near its all time closing peak, reached in 2022 over the past several sessions, but it is now down about 1% from that record high.

CNA


Meantime, the tech heavy Nasdaq shed about two tenths of a percent. Boeing was the biggest loser in the Dow, shedding about 8%. The plane maker has yet to regain investor confidence after us aviation regulators extended the grounding of its seven three seven max nine jets indefinitely for new safety checks. Spirit Airlines, though, losing more altitude over a blocked acquisition deal. A federal judge ruled against JetBlue’s nearly $4 billion takeover proposal of spirit airlines over antitrust issues. And as equities tumbled, US treasury yields rose with the dollar amid easing rate cut expectations. Yields on benchmark tenure notes are back above 4%. Again on hawkish remarks from Fed governor Christopher Waller. Tony Nash, founder and CEO at Complete Intelligence, joins us for more now. Tony, we’re looking at Wall Street’s sell off accelerating. We’re hearing at the that, you know, markets may have gotten ahead of themselves regarding how deep and how fast those policy rate cuts could be. Your take on that and how we can expect markets to move?

Tony Nash


Sure, the problem with us markets right now is that they’re priced for perfection. So if anything goes wrong, if the Fed signals an overly hawkish message or an overly dovish message, or say, a government macroeconomic data print comes out that isn’t perfect, or if company earnings don’t come out that aren’t perfect, then we can really see some wobbles in us markets. So I’m not really sure about the resilience of markets here. I think what we’ve been telling our customers is you’re going to see some intramonth volatility for the next few months until investors become confident in the direction of the Fed.

CNA


At the same time, this year is a pretty big one. For the US. It is election year. How much of this of lack last step performance is actually due to this? S&P 500 historically performs well in an election year, but it typically sees a slower start first, or is this just part of what is usually happening?

Tony Nash


Yeah, a lot of this really depends on Janet Yellen, the treasury secretary. If she can sell enough bonds to have cash to spend money from the US government, then we can really see markets rally pretty hard. But if Yellen can’t get the authority and can’t sell the bonds necessary to do that, then the US fiscal spending will be problematic. We also have a budget that’s going through in the US and a tentative budget agreement. If the Republicans halt that agreement and make more fiscal spending cut demands, then that could weigh on the US economy as well. Yes, traditionally markets do well in a presidential year, but I think there’s a little bit uncertainty around the election. And people, I think people are a little bit hesitant to spend partly because they’re a little bit loaded up on debt or a lot loaded up on debt. And we’ve seen a really robust 22 and 23. And so really people are wondering how far can we push this in 2024?

CNA


Indeed, dampening sentiment there. Big bank earnings. We’ve got Goldman and Morgan did the latest two report appears to be quite a mixed bag, but mostly not so great this quarter. And that’s weighed on Wall street as well. How do you read the latest earnings report? Are we talking bad debt, the lingering effects of high for longer rates? And what does it tell you about the consumer?

Tony Nash


Yeah, I think that what we’re really waiting for is some of these middle regional banks to see how they report because we’ll know how, say, commercial lending is doing and how commercial real estate lending and how consumers are doing. It’ll be much more evident as we see these regional and mid sized banks report. The larger banks, they’ll be fine. They are fine. They know how to manage and trade off the different lines of business that they have. It really is the mid sized banks that we’re waiting on and that will set the tone for a lot of the corporate finance and banking and insurance for the next quarter.

CNA


All right, Tony, appreciate time this morning. Tony Nash, founder and CEO at Complete Intelligence.

Categories
Week Ahead

Bitcoin ETFs, inflation and labor data; industrial metals and junior miners; and the Yellen factor

Bitcoin ETFs, inflation and labor data; industrial metals and junior miners; and the Yellen factor

Experience the power of AI in forecasting Markets. Subscribe to CI Markets Free: https://completeintel.com/markets

Welcome to another episode of the Week Ahead! Today, we’ve got a fantastic lineup with Mike Green, Tracy Shuchart, and Albert Marko getting into some of these hot topics.

🚀 Bitcoin ETFs, Inflation, and Labor Data with Mike.

Mike breaks down the recent approval of spot Bitcoin ETFs, the surge in Bitcoin prices, and contrasting views from Cathie Wood and Vanguard. We’ll discuss how these ETFs could shake up the crypto landscape.

Plus, Mike shares insights on inflation and wage growth, exploring whether inflation might take an unexpected turn this year. And of course, we’ll touch on the intricacies of US jobs data and the impact of flawed birth/death adjustments.

🛠️ Industrial Metals and Junior Miners with Tracy.


Tracy explores the recent rally and subsequent dip in prices, keeping an eye on the copper futures and the Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF. Tracy breaks down the factors influencing these markets and what to watch out for in the near future.

💼 The Yellen Factor with Albert.


Albert discusses the Yellen factor as he explores recent developments, such as the potential end of negative rates in Japan and Lagarde’s stance on the ECB. Albert raises a thought-provoking question: Are the BOJ and ECB statements influencing the Fed’s dovishness? We’ll unpack the global economic chessboard and how it might impact the USD.

Transcript

Tony Nash


Hi everyone and welcome to Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. Today we’re joined by Mike Green, Tracy Shuchart and Albert Marko. We’ve got some key themes today, of course. Late this week we saw the US fire submissive of Yemen over the Red Sea issues. We’re going to jump into that a little bit in Tracy’s section on industrial metals, and we’ll talk a little bit about crude, a little bit about shipping, that sort of thing. But we’re going to first cover bitcoin ETFs, inflation, labor data with Mike. Mike covers everything. So we want to kind of jam a lot in there. With Tracy, we want to talk about industrial metals and some of the junior miners, which she’s been paying attention to. And with Albert, we want to talk about central banks and really the influence of Yellen on some of these, on, obviously the Fed and some of these other central banks.

Tony Nash


So before we get started, I want to let you know about a new free tier we have within CI Markets, our global market forecasting platform. We want to share the power of CI Markets with everyone. So we’ve made a few things for you. First, economics. We share all of our global economics forecasts for the top 50 economies.

Tony Nash


We also share our major currency forecasts as well as Nikkei 100 stocks. So you can get a look at. What do our stock forecasts look like? There is no credit card required. You can just sign up on our website and get started right away. So check it out. CI Markets free. Look at the link below and get started ASAP. Thank you.

Tony Nash


So, guys, exciting evening. There’s stuff going on in the Middle East. It seems like the punchline always ends. Earlier this week, we saw a lot about the bitcoin ETF and the approval of that. First the non approval of it, and then the approval of it. Mike, you and I first spoke about bitcoin, I think, a couple of years ago when the PLA in China was the largest miner of bitcoin. Of course, bitcoin is up, what, 75% since October, which is totally normal for an asset. Right.

Tony Nash


We have Cathie Wood saying that the base case for bitcoin is $600,000. We have vanguard and a bunch of other firms saying they won’t allow crypto ETFs on their platform. So what happens with this? Even with a spot bitcoin ETF, does it still stay this kind of fringy, exciting, volatile asset, or does it really come into being kind of a normative type of asset that people invest in? I’m not pro or anti bitcoin here. I’m just trying to really understand what’s the implication of this bitcoin ETF?

A graph with blue lines

Description automatically generated

Mike Green


Well, I think what the bitcoin ETF does is exactly what the bitcoin proponents highlight is that it makes it available to more individuals at lower effort. So those who are very interested in owning bitcoin would have made the effort to put themselves onto coinbase or onto alternative exchanges to obtain it, or they would have mined it. Now, suddenly, it’s easily available in an ETF framework, right? It’s not dissimilar. A lot of people have compared it to the introduction of the GLD ETF that made gold easily available for many retail investors relative to going to a coin store and buying physical gold, or arranging for wholesale delivery in some way, shape or form, or buying miners. Right.

Mike Green

And so one of the things that we’ve already started to see is a derating of many of the proxies for bitcoin. Things like the miners, things like MicroStrategy, et cetera, have derated fairly sharply in the immediate lead up to this, even as they benefited from the appreciation of bitcoin. By the way, I think the bitcoin appreciation is more than you’re actually highlighting.

Mike Green


That underlying dynamic I think is likely to play out here as well, where if you were buying through a proxy, this now allows you to buy, theoretically direct access to bitcoin. I personally think that this is going to be more of a sell the news type framework. That certainly seems to be what’s playing out. And so it’s adverse for both things like Coinbase and MicroStrategy, as well as bitcoin itself. Candidly. People purchase in advance of an event that’s as easily available and well known as this. I gotta be honest with you. I don’t know that there’s going to be that much dramatic volume that actually transits over to bitcoin. As much enthusiasm as we see on Twitter, et cetera, for bitcoin at this point, the Google search volumes the interest in it. The actual utility of bitcoin has fallen and not substantively changed in any meaningful way over the last couple of years. And so I just kind of see this as a nothing burger. I had a joke where I was going to pull up the scene from Jerry Maguire where Cuba Gooding Jr. Says, you know, people can have the coin, but they can’t have the Quan.

Mike Green


I think bitcoin has lost the Quan. I don’t think anyone really cares or really believes that this is the future of finance.

Tony Nash


And something I was saying earlier this week is, I don’t understand. If there’s such inherent value in bitcoin, immutable inherent value, then why is everyone pumping it up pre the ETF? I just feel like there’s this expectation that because it’s an ETF, it’s going to multiple x. But if the inherent value is already there, why aren’t we already close to the inherent value?

Mike Green


Well, when you talk about the inherent value, I mean, again, it, beyond the question of what is intrinsic or inherent value actually mean.

Tony Nash


It has the intrinsic value of a cell in my excel workbook, is what I believe.

Mike Green


Yeah, that’s basically what it is. I mean, look, bitcoin itself is the token that is released as payment to the accountants on the blockchain. Bitcoin. Blockchain. That’s it. That’s all it is.

Mike Green


And everything else we’re engaged in is secondary trading of those tokens. Now, at some point, under a proof of stake type framework, people might actually value those bitcoins as a mechanism for providing collateral to prove transactions or to underwrite transactions. But that’s not the current configuration, right? I mean, that’s what’s happening in staking or other components, but that’s not what is actually happening in the bitcoin network itself. And so we’re now ten plus years in. And in contrast to something like AI that I use on a daily basis now.

Mike Green


Other than speculative trading, I still am not at all sure what anyone thinks we’re getting out of bitcoin.

Tony Nash


Yeah, it’s not a currency. I mean, we’ve talked about this before. It’s an asset. It’s not a currency. Right?

Mike Green


It is a speculative asset that, in my opinion, remains largely inflated on the basis of a flawed underlying belief system.

Tony Nash


But I think you just don’t get it, Mike.

Mike Green


Yeah, that’s it. No, well, I haven’t done the work.

Tony Nash


And you don’t get it.

Mike Green


And I’ve accepted that I’m not going to make it. So I’m just not sure what else can be thrown at me.

Tony Nash


Right? Not going to make it. Albert, jump in.

Albert Marko


Mean, I don’t even know if I want to jump in here. I’m happy for Mike to take all the blowback that’s coming from all the crypto guys because I’ve taken heat for it for years saying that things are speculative asset and not a reserve currency and all that other Ponzi nonsense that gets spouted out there. And I think Mike is absolutely correct. This is a sell the event type thing. I mean, most likely helping those big clients that hold crypto for exit event.

Mike Green


Absolutely.

Albert Marko


Yeah. But then the whole bitcoin appreciation to $1 million, like Cathie Wood is spouting out there is a belief system like who’s the next bag holder? And having an ETF takes that away completely for these people. So this is know, I can’t really add on to what Mike said. He’s spot on.

Tony Nash


Right. And until bitcoin has a global military presence, it’s really not easy to enforce.

Albert Marko


Yeah, but we can make a joke like that. But that’s actually accurate. And on top of that, bitcoin doesn’t even do anything. It needs government systems to transact, whether it’s the Internet, financial institutions, so on and so forth. So it’s not its own entity that’s living outside of the central system. It doesn’t do that.

Tony Nash


Okay, good. So again, people who are going to hate what we said about bitcoin, we’ll take it on. We’re not going to make it. We’ve already accepted that. As Mike said.

Mike Green


How can you take. Seriously anything coming from a guy who’s drinking coffee, from a little mug that has a little birdie on the handle? Come on.

Tony Nash


That’s right. Exactly. Okay, very good. Next, I want to hear a little bit about your inflation outlook, Mike. So earlier this week, you said that demand configuration for the US is not supportive of higher inflation and that wage growth presents headwinds for inflation. So do you think inflation stalls out and potentially goes negative for a short period this year? You had this great Brookings graph you sent out. So what’s your thinking? And kind of, I guess also in terms of maybe the timing, where do we hit that point where the headwinds are strongest against inflation in 24?

A graph of a graph with pink lines

Description automatically generated with medium confidence

Mike Green


Well, so there’s a number of things that are going on in terms of the lagged components in the inflation dynamics. Right.

Mike Green


So many people have correctly highlighted the dramatic increases in insurance rates, for example, which are now basically driving all of the increase in transportation services, for example. Those are a distinctly lagged component that’s tied to the dramatically higher costs of vehicles and tied to the higher cost of parts and service.

Mike Green


So if I total my car or if I crash my car, the insurance company has to replace it with an equivalent vehicle. If the price of those vehicles is dramatically higher, guess what? The insurance policy is going to have to increase because the frequency of accidents hasn’t changed.

Mike Green


If anything, it’s increased as Americans have become nuttier and nuttier over the past few years. And candidly, watching my own Gen Z children drive, I’m terrified for the future of the roads and eagerly awaiting the self driving vehicles. So you’re looking at a situation in which what’s happening today in many of these categories reflects asset price changes that happened last year. And as I look forward to next year, what’s the rationale other than an extreme expression of market power, which candidly is likely to be reversed by a variety of regulatory decisions that basically put pressure on the insurance agencies for doing stuff that’s very distinctly unpopular right now.

Mike Green


And I’m not arguing that’s good, but I’m just acknowledging that that’s highly probable. You’re actually looking at a situation where what’s going to cause it to increase by a similar magnitude next year? I can’t really identify why that would happen.

Mike Green


In housing, we’re seeing similar components again. The frequency of burning your home down has not changed to any meaningful degree at the same price that the cost of replacing that home has gone up dramatically. We’ve also seen dynamics of concentration, et cetera, some market power components, but it becomes very hard to imagine that we’re going to see anything that looks remotely like what we saw in the past twelve months, in the next twelve months. And so all of those create headwinds. And the thing that I’m talking about in terms of the configuration for inflation is, remember, when a supply chain disruption occurs, you basically need to recover an element of the lost production, right. If I choose to not replace my car because it’s expensive, I will ultimately have to replace that car. I just want to be very clear. I’m not going to replace it one and a half times to make up for that lost component. I’ve just used my old car, or I’ve figured out how to borrow somebody else’s car over that time period. But there is an element of catching up that ultimately has to happen. The configuration I’m referring to is if you have very rapid population or labor force growth, what that means is that demand is going to rise in the interim period, right?

Mike Green


So not only are you going to have that catch up, but you’re going to have to match that next part. And that’s what was really unique in the 1970s, was every time you encountered a supply disruption, supply would fall 5%. Demand in terms of the number of people was rising in the neighborhood of three to percent five, which meant that you had to make up 10% as much production in order to just get back to the base case. And that is a very different configuration that we have today, where the population is really not growing at all. In particular, the high consumption labor force components are just not growing in any meaningful fashion. And so the headwinds are dramatically less than people are used to thinking about in terms of the dynamics of inflation. So the flip side, the counter to my argument at this point, is many of the cyclical components, things like oil, et cetera, have been under distinct pressure. Those will likely emerge. There certainly will be times over the course of the year, particularly if we’re engaged in combat with Houthi’s and the Red Sea, et cetera. As Tracy has pointed out in our pre conversation, this is going to slow the transit of oil.

Mike Green


It means that more oil needs to be in inventory, which means all else equal, we need more production, et cetera. But those, while they certainly can be a temporary influence, once you start making it around the horn or start making it around the cape instead of going through the Red Sea, once you solve that once, once that inventory is out there and there’s no shortage of OPEC production capability, as you’re well aware, you’ve resolved the problem.

Mike Green


It just doesn’t work in quite the same way. And yes, I know that there’s slightly more use of oil tankers this year, longer in transit, et cetera, but we solve supply problems very easily unless demand is taking off, and we just don’t see any signs that demand is taking off in any meaningful way.

Tony Nash


Right. Okay. So there are two components. One is the good side, which you’ve talked about with crude and manufacturing, and demand kind of more people in the workforce or whatever. I think the other side is the services side. And that seems to be moderating.

Tony Nash


That’s what you’re saying with the wages.

Mike Green


Well, you’re seeing them moderate on two fronts.

Mike Green


So one is that the unemployment rates for the least skilled in our society are beginning to rise as immigration has picked up dramatically and those jobs are increasingly, there’s increasing competition for those jobs. That’s an important component to it. The second is when you have this type of extreme move in services, you actually start something, or shortages in labor, you start something in motion that you can’t stop once it started. And the only other time, I just want to emphasize the only other time we saw a contraction in services employment. And the ISM services employment is a warning sign, in my opinion. When you see a contraction in services employment, that’s a really bad thing because that has been the underlying growth engine of the US economy for the past 70, 80 years, has been the continued share gain of services in the economy. But people forget that that’s coming off of an extremely high level of what we would call marketable activity beforehand.

Mike Green


So we talk about GDP and we think about the sale of washing machines. Well, what did we have before the sale of washing machines? We had services called washer women that would go around and do your laundry for you. What were the 1920s and 1930s all about? They were actually about the introduction of electricity and automation into the home, where many of those services that had been outsourced to low end workers were suddenly productized. And we’re seeing this same underlying dynamic.

Mike Green


How many people, I don’t know if anyone on this call has a robotic vacuum, but that’s a big innovation along the lines of something like a dishwasher.

Mike Green


They’re now incorporating mopping capabilities, et cetera. Our alarm systems are increasingly not installed by ADP or ADT. I’m sorry. You order them from Amazon and you plug them in. Right. All of these services that we have traditionally thought of as being recession resistant suddenly being replaced by products. I actually think this is a really underappreciated and important feature of the current environment.

Tony Nash


I think you’re exactly right.

Mike Green


Same thing, by the way. Walk through a McDonald’s. I mean, go to a McDonald’s, don’t eat the food, but go to a McDonald’s.

Mike Green


And actually look at the difference versus where it used to be.

Mike Green


You now go to a kiosk. You don’t even have to interact with a human being. The labor content in the kitchen, the franchises are gaining versus the local diner because there’s a shortage of workers. There’s been a relative shortage of workers that’s encouraged McDonald’s and Burger King and others to engage in labor saving devices that they can take advantage of but are very hard at this point for the local diner to take advantage of. That’s led to share gain. It’s led to relative price improvement for them versus others. And as those things filter through society, it’s no different than replacing the washer woman with the washing machine. It’s no different than replacing the 37 piece orchestra with a victrola. Right. It’s no different than the radio or the television introducing dramatically more forms of entertainment. But that can be broadcast to everybody else. These innovations roll out very quickly once they hit that threshold and the one that, candidly, everyone’s kind of poo pooing it now, but it’s getting closer and closer. Are things like self driving vehicles?

Tony Nash


Oh, yeah, that’ll be amazing once it happens. I mean, I want everyone else to go first, but viable, I think it’ll be incredible. So I hear what you’re saying on the services low end, and I think that’s fascinating in terms of a lot of those low end services workers. I do keep hearing about how, say, retail stores who’ve done self checkout, some of them are going back and not doing self checkout. That seems like a process that needs some calibration rather than a fundamental kind of reversion back to using people. I just don’t know. But I also think about, and I know this has been talked about for a year now, but when I was with larger research firms and I had to hire an entry level master’s educated, say, analyst, and I’d pay them 70 plus thousand dollars a year, most of that stuff can be done through a $20 subscription for some sort of AI platform now, right? And so it’s the low end, say, customer services jobs. It’s also, I think, a lot of the low end white collar jobs that are being innovated. Are they ready to be fully innovated and fully automated right now?

Tony Nash


Probably not. But we’re at this point, as you mentioned, where that stuff is plausible now. And it wasn’t just two or three years ago, is that right?

Mike Green


Yeah, I think that’s right. I think that’s absolutely correct. And I think, again, this is the inevitable march of technology. Once you create this type of impulse, nobody wants to change unless they’re forced to. Right?

Mike Green


And when you encounter the type of disruption that we’ve actually encouraged, it forces people to rethink business models, it forces them to redesign kitchens, it forces them to make choices that are accommodative for a shortage of labor. And they don’t reverse that when the shortage of labor reverses.

Mike Green


You don’t turn around and you’re like, oh, you know what? A very real example. The push for the invention of the horseless carriage in the 1870s. It led to the prizes to Carl Benz and others for the creation of horseless carriages was created by the great episodic plague that led to roughly a third of the horses worldwide dropping dead in the streets.

Mike Green


When you have that type of event and you end up replacing the horses that are in shortage or creating the technology to replace it, it’s not like suddenly people sat there in 1910 and like, oh, my gosh, look at all the horses around, right? We really should go back to those things, right? Let’s stop using cars and trucks and let’s go do lots of horses. I’m sure people are tempted to do that, but I have yet to see people saddled cowboys on the highways with me. I think people just forget this stuff once it happens, once it’s been sold. It applies to human labor as well as commodities. The cure for high prices is high prices.

Tony Nash


Yep, that’s right. Okay, let’s move on to jobs data and NFP and labor data. And I know this isn’t a new topic for you, Mike, you’ve been talking about it for years, but obviously NFP gets a huge amount of attention every month when it comes out. I’ve got a tweet from 2023, but I’ve seen them from you from 2020 and before commenting on, say, the accuracy or misrepresentation of things like birth death adjustments within unemployment data. Can you talk us through that? Kind of on a little bit of a novice level so that people can understand, because we’re hearing about jobs data.

A screenshot of a social media post

Description automatically generated

Tony Nash

We’ve heard about it for the last two years about how things are amazing. And this isn’t a partisan thing because it happened before this administration, but can you talk us through that and how it impacts, say, the unemployment rate and the number of, say, new jobs created, that sort of thing?

Tony Nash


Hey, I’d like to make sure you know that you can access our AI driven market forecasting tool called CI Markets for free, no strings attached, and it does not require any credit card information. Go to completeintel.com/markets to subscribe.

Tony Nash


CI Markets is the perfect addition to your analysis toolbox. This free account includes Nikkei stocks, major currency pairs, and global economics. Of course, we offer much more in our paid account, but this lets you experience CI Markets before making a financial commitment. CI Markets uses the power of AI to help you make better trading investment decisions. It’s absolutely free. Again, go to completeintel.com/markets to subscribe to CI Markets free.

Mike Green


Sure. So what you’re referring to is what’s called the birth death adjustment. This is an attempt by the BLS that was introduced originally, I believe, in 2000 and then reconstituted in 2012 and again in 2020. That attempts to model the new business formations that lead to employment but would not necessarily be captured by survey methodology.

Mike Green


It’s hard enough for most of us to figure out who startups are, add on a layer of government bureaucracy. There’s absolutely no chance they’re going to figure out who they are. So they make an assumption that there’s a certain pace of new business formations that’s occurring.

Mike Green


There’s all sorts of adjustments that are made. And I encourage people to just be very careful in the treatment of the data. The birth death adjustments are non seasonally adjusted. They need to be applied to the non seasonally adjusted numbers. And even when you do that, it’s not really quite as simple as everybody thinks because every month has its own unique characteristics to it. But you can be pretty safe by looking at something like the trailing twelve month contributions to the birth death adjustment. The second thing that’s really important is to remember that the birth death adjustment, this modeling of new businesses, by definition, doesn’t apply to government jobs, right. Because there are new, new governments being founded. I’m unaware of a 51st state. Puerto Rico is trying to avoid it, but there are no new governments in process. Right? So there is no element of birth death associated with it. And so all of these assumptions are tied to the private sector. And so what we’ve actually seen is we’ve seen a dramatic slowdown in hiring from the private sector. We’ve seen a dramatic decrease in new jobs coming from the private sector, with most of the jobs now coming from public or things tied to, like, medical care.

Mike Green


And as a result, it just gets crazier and crazier to be modeling that there’s a constant and continuing increase of new businesses that are happening in the private sector. And this methodology does a terrible job. I actually will just share the chart according to the BLS, right, this is the source of private sector jobs. This is the private sector payrolls numbers x birth death. This is the trailing twelve month net birth death adjustment, which gets rid of the seasonality, as you can see. And one of the features is, post Covid, we supposedly entered into a new era of entrepreneurship, et cetera. But those jobs are now accounting. Those quote unquote, made up, assumed jobs are now accounting for more than half of the private sector job creation.

Tony Nash


Everyone’s side gig while they’re working from home.

Mike Green


Yeah. And there’s also that second component you do have to be somewhat careful of, which is as an economy weakens and people face deteriorating finances in their household, they seek out a second job. And so we’ve also seen a surge in jobs that are secondary jobs, even for those with full time employment, as they effectively attempt to tap into what remains a robust labor market and improve their individual situation.

Mike Green


But as they do that, they increase the supply of labor that’s available, they begin to pressure wages. And that’s really what we’re seeing is that real wages, for all the hoopla about the fact that they turned positive, congratulations really, that’s more tied to falling inflation numbers than anything else. We’re actually seeing nominal wage gains deteriorate fairly significantly, and we’re seeing real wages on an effective basis, adjusting for reduced hours and everything else. Those are basically totally flat.

Mike Green


So there is no growth, there is no growth in employment outside of some government jobs. There is no growth in wages. And that’s stagnation. That’s creating an economy that’s heading into a recession. And I don’t think it’s a coincidence. Obviously, this is a relatively short data series, but when you see this crossover, when you see this slow moving, effectively fixed component become the majority of jobs, they’re not really happening is kind of the easiest way to put it. And I think this is a big chunk of the revisions that we’re seeing, et cetera. We also just saw the household survey, and this is actually important. The household survey just saw a dramatic change, a decrease in full time employment and jobs overall that’s tied to population adjustments. It’s not like the survey suddenly went out and like, oh, look at all these people lost their jobs in December. People tend to underappreciate that. But what that actually is, is confirmation of my concern around these components, because when you restate the household numbers or you do the household numbers, they’re not restated in the same way. The revisions are done for the NFP. It basically is just telling us that the employment gains for 2023 were largely fictitious.

Tony Nash


Okay, yeah, let’s dig into that a little bit.

Tony Nash


We have seen for the last, what, six months? Or is it the last twelve months, the previous prints revised down always. And the way it feels to me is that they’re continuing to shuffle forward, say, 20 to 30,000 jobs. They take it from the past, put it in the future, take it from the past, or take it from the past, put it in the current, take it from the past, put it in the current, and it’s this statistical shell game of moving things forward and then adjusting it down later on. Whether that’s intentional or not, that’s really the way it appears. So why is that happening? If your model doesn’t adjust after a while, you have to figure out what’s wrong with your model, right, rather than just keep continuing to move these things. So what’s going on there? I mean, honestly, to me it appears very manipulative.

Mike Green


First of all, I don’t think it’s actually, and Albert could probably comment on this as well, but I don’t actually think it’s intentional. I don’t think that there’s green eye shade accountants in the BLS who are like, boy, I’m really looking to pump up the numbers for Joseph Biden.

Mike Green


The methodology is really critical here. So the non farm payrolls is an establishment survey where effectively a form is filled out, submitted electronically by businesses saying, we created x number of jobs.

Mike Green


The response rates to that survey have plummeted. They’ve fallen from about 70% pre Covid to today. They’re running in the 30% range. Part of that’s work from home. Part of that’s the fact that people just don’t care as much. Part of that is that there’s no penalty associated with it, so why would I bother? Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Mike Green


When you fail to respond to that survey, the assumption methodology is that those who fail to respond to the survey expanded in the same way that those who responded to the survey.

Mike Green


So you’re effectively taking what had been a 70% response rate and forecasting 30% to get to that 100%. Today we’re taking 30%. And assuming that everybody else is there, that naturally leads to overstatements, because I’ll just be really straightforward. Who’s more likely to respond to a survey? Somebody whose business is going well or somebody whose business is imploding? And so when you talk about the change in the model, the irony is all of these models use what’s called an ARIMA methodology, which is an autoregressive.

Tony Nash


Just a moving average.

Mike Green


Correct. It’s a rolling regression, to be very precise.

Mike Green


And that’s the equivalent of you are driving your car in a straightaway and you see the turn up ahead, you have to start adjusting for it in advance. But if you’re only using your rear view mirror and incorporating the data as it comes, you’re going to be eternally late for that time.

Tony Nash


All they use is Arima. Like, I had no idea it was that simple.

Mike Green


It’s really that simple.

Tony Nash


Oh, my. So. And for people who don’t follow Mike, I’m sure everyone does. But Mike is very good at pulling out and explaining methodologies. So I’m a nerd about methodologies. I’m less vocal about it because it’s really hard to explain. Mike is very good at understanding these methodologies and explaining them in very understandable ways. So if you’re using government data prints, and I know a lot of government data prints are kind of trade the news, but you have to understand the methodology, and you have to understand the issues associated with those methodologies, I trust very few government data prints. Unemployment, retail sales, consumer spending. These are the worst data prints globally. GDP, of course, the worst data prints globally. But if you are not following Mike, look back on his historical tweets. He’s excellent at explaining the methodological issues associated with government data, especially in the US.

Mike Green


Yeah, well, I think that’s. First, you emphasize the right part, especially in the US. The second component is that because I’m not a natural mathematician, it’s important for me to really dig into these things and make sure that I can actually understand what the hell is going on. I think this is one of the challenges. People who are naturally gifted at math, they’ll look at a series like, oh, of course, right. But they often don’t then lead themselves to the question of, well, what does this imply and how does this model differ from the real world?

Mike Green


The model becomes the territory as compared to the actual physical territory becoming it. And candidly, just, I think being old, one of the primary skills that you bring, you can no longer bring computational intensity and speed. You can basically just bring a. Yeah, no, that’s wrong. Right. That can’t possibly fit the data sets that we’re seeing properly. And it would be exactly like an ARIMA methodology, as you’re going into a turn at high speed.

Mike Green


You know, and you have to adjust, and the ARIMA is telling you it’s basically a straight road.

Tony Nash


Right.

Mike Green


No, it’s not. I’m looking at it. Right.

Mike Green


But the second thing that becomes really interesting, though, is that a lot of the tools that we use for leading indicators, things like what the stock market is doing or what the credit market spread, the credit spreads are doing, those themselves have actually been turned into lagging methodology by virtue of the way we choose to invest in them now. So it used to be that you’d have a legion of individual investors or portfolio managers that were directing most of the assets on a discretionary basis. They’d see the data sets begin to change, they’d see things begin to slow, they’d begin to rotate their portfolios into higher cash allowances and into safety.

Mike Green


That became the dominant feature in the market. And as that was occurring, as thoughtful application of those principles was being applied, the stock market was a leading indicator. Today, the dominant flows into stock markets are simply passive allocations from 401K plans. So if you have a job, which is a lagging indicator, you are investing 100% of your normal proceeds into the market, unless you’re in the very rare minority of people who are changing your allocations. And that, in turn means that the stock market has now actually turned into a lagging tool. And as a narrative species, we still haven’t made that adjustment.

Mike Green


So we keep saying, well, what is the market pricing in the market’s pricing? Nothing in it has no idea what you’re talking about. There’s nobody at vanguard paying attention to the apple earnings call. There’s nobody, you know, doing any of this stuff anymore. And candidly, the rest of us have become increasingly nihilistic and throwing up our hands. We’re like, none of it makes any sense. Well, that’s because we’re thinking about it as lagging as compared to an increasingly mechanical tool that reflects the flows that are occurring tied to lagging indicators as compared to leading indicators. This is a super challenging and interesting time period, particularly in developed markets. We’re used to thinking about China data as being garbage, but it’s unusual to think about us data as being garbage. And when it comes out, and this is the last thing I would just say on this, Tony, is your suspicion of the like, it’s an unintended consequence of over indexing on the wrong.

Tony Nash


I want to go into that for a little bit, and I wasn’t planning to talk about this, but when I was working in China, I was talking to one of the data scientists from Baidu, and he told me that they have a better idea of daily GDP readings than the Chinese government does, than the BLS does. And they were considering developing something around like a daily economic activity reading. So I just don’t understand where we have say, I’m going to hate to do this, but Google or all the people who have all of this data, we could actually have a compilation of daily activity that doesn’t take a bunch of government statisticians. This just comes up kind of automatically segmented. Albert, you’re saying, no.

Albert Marko


No, you can do it, but they don’t want it.

Tony Nash


No, they don’t.

Albert Marko


Why would they want sort of transparency like that when they can use the BLS and coal adjustments and anything else to rally the markets or make growth look like it’s positive? I think Steiner from hedge eye went through how the federal and state government single handedly turbocharged the economy in Q1 last year through cola adjustments and other nonsense like the BLS, like Mike was talking about, accounted for 80% of the growth with Yellen and the treasury being 40% of it, and the reality that growth has been negative 20 last year, and we can go through all these government statistics like Mike was talking about. And start shredding them apart. But the reality is, perception is reality with the markets and these algos and, yeah, these algos and traders are just going to take whatever face value number is thrown at them and they’re going to trade it. That’s just the reality of it. No one cares about revisions. Nobody.

Tony Nash


Right. And this is the thing that I’ll just kind of, as a side note, say all the stuff that you’re hearing about company implementation generally of things like AI and machine learning, is just reactive to some of these headline numbers. And a lot of what you’re hearing about, say, enterprises deploying AI, as Mike said with the BLS, they’re ARIMA algorithms, which is just simply a moving average. So very few of these companies you hear about kind of deploying AI are actually deploying real machine learning algorithms. They’re deploying things like ARIMA to decide what their business is going to do. And you can do that in excel. Right now, before we get off of this really bad data, want to. You are notorious for talking about API data. So can you talk to us a little bit about. Because when we talk about, say, market data, that’s market clearing data, right? When we talk about government data, that’s statistically driven fiction. But when we talk about things like API data, that’s supposed to be kind of supply and utilization data. So how is that kind of stuff developed?

Tracy Shuchart


Well, I think, well, API, first of all, if you look at API versus EIA, which is the American Petroleum Institute, which is a private entity, compared to EIA, which is obviously government, if you look at the API data, the thing with that data, that why it’s kind of hit or miss is because it’s not mandatory. So it’s just voluntary reporting to a trade union. That’s it. And so if you don’t have time to report that week, you don’t have time to report that week.

Tony Nash


Okay?

Tracy Shuchart


So that’s where you kind of sometimes get hit or miss. I mean, most people do report to it, but again, it’s not mandatory. That said, it is mandatory to report to EIA. But I’ve been talking about this since, about, since 2020, we’ve seen a huge deterioration in the data because of some of the metrics that they have changed. Right. They had this adjustment and they kept kind of, which is literally a fudge factor. This is how much we plus or minus think we’re off this week because of the increasing amount of NGLs that these wells are producing. And so that number has, and then that number has been wild. Because they really can’t keep track of it. So that fluctuation week to week really is too much of a fudge. Like it shouldn’t be 1015 million barrels a week. And then they just changed the definition again. They fudged it a little bit again in September. And then we’ve seen their demand data has been off by the time they get to their monthly reports. So, guys, I would tell you it’s two months lagging, but the 914 monthly reports are much better as far as data is concerned.

Tony Nash


Okay, so a lot of this has to do with whether it’s the establishment data on labor or whether it’s EIA or whatever has to do with response rates, right? So we’re using, say, survey based methodologies that haven’t changed in, say, 2030 years and expecting that to reflect the market today. So again, as people who watch this use government data, use industry association data, other things that are not market clearing, they have to be aware that there are huge flaws in those data sets and in those responses. Now, Tracy, when you said that EIA changed their methodology, do they then do retroactive changes on the previous data sets?

Tracy Shuchart


No.

Tony Nash


Of course. Mean on some level that makes sense. So, Mike, you were about to add.

Mike Green


I mean, I guess I would just say a couple of things, right? When we say that the data is fiction or flawed, it’s a best attempt, but we tend to forget we look at things like averages. You mentioned a moving average, et cetera, and we don’t adjust those for the standard deviations around that.

Mike Green


So one of the things you’re seeing all over the place is discussions of the presidential cycle and all these components. The reality is that the variance or the variability of outcomes dwarfs the averages.

Mike Green


I can say yes. In Democrat third year or fourth year election years, there’s been outperformance over prior years in terms of the history. But remember, you’ve only got a few of those observations over any meaningful period. When people start saying things like in the data set since 1950. Well, there’s just not that many election years where Democrats were in charge. You just get this incredibly small n, right, which is number of observations, which tells you that the data sets are basically just designed. Like, what people are trying to do is grab your attention with interesting factoids that have no statistical relevance whatsoever. And then we get upset when the data reverses, like, oh, it was manipulated, or it’s just, I’m sorry, that just doesn’t actually mean anything. We’re over indexing on stuff that has no statistical validity.

Tony Nash


Exactly. Okay, let’s move on to looking at some industrial metals. Tracy, I want to talk to you a little bit about industrial metals and what’s happening, but first, I want to have a very quick conversation about what’s happening in Yemen right now, what’s happening in terms of impact on crude price and impact on shipping. So can we cover that real quick? We saw crude prices spike overnight. What do you expect to happen in the short term with crude prices?

Tracy Shuchart


I think that this has definitely put a near term floor under it, but we have to see how the next days and weeks sort of play themselves out. But for now, it’s kind of put a floor underneath it. We haven’t, certainly didn’t see oil prices spike as much as they did. Say when Russia invaded Ukraine. I think we were up like $7 on the day. We were up $3 earlier. We’ve come back down a little bit, so certainly we’re not getting that kind of a reaction, but I think that this is going to keep at least oil prices elevated. Now, the news that did come out this morning, I think that is more interesting is that by and large, mostly tankers have been transiting the Suez and the Red Sea, and it’s mostly been the container shipping market that has been avoiding it. The big MaRisk and all the big players as far as that’s concerned. But we had INTERTANKO, which represents 70% of the world’s oil and gas tankers, has told its members, know for the first time, warn its members that they should stay out of the Red Sea. Now, of course, it’s just a warning, right now.

Tracy Shuchart


It’s not, this is what you must do, but it certainly would make a difference if we started seeing these tankers. By and large, in the amounts that we’re seeing these container ships start rerouting, that will add a whole new dynamic, as in extra fuel consumption, things of that nature that might spook the markets a little bit. And I think that’s part of the reason we’re seeing elevated prices today, not only because of the attack, but because now tankers are being told, we don’t really think you should transit this area. Right. I think that’s probably the bigger news. And again, we’re going to have to see how this all plays out. But keep your eye on the taker market. Certainly even more ships having to go around the cape, adding ten to 30 days, depending on your export hub origination, is going to matter as far as extra fuel consumption.

Tony Nash


Interesting.

Albert Marko

Yeah, but the extra fuel consumption is actually equal to the Suez Canal toll so there’s not really a cost difference, it’s just a timing. And so that’s what I’d have to add to that.

Tony Nash


And so that’s mostly fuel for Europe. Right.

Tony Nash


So could we see a midwinter spike in energy prices in Europe?

Tracy Shuchart

Well, I think the seasonality really starts about mid February anyway, as maintenance season starts. And that’s generally just this seasonal kind of trend in oil. I wouldn’t count on it since 2020 and oil prices went negative and with COVID and the world economy shut down. So seasonality hasn’t been as regular as it has been in the past. But that is kind of when seasonality does.

Albert Marko


There’s also, Tony, there’s plenty of Russian oil floating around Turkey.

Tony Nash


Yeah, there is.

Albert Marko


The Dutch can buy as much as they want.

Tony Nash


Good, good. That’s good to know. Okay, let’s move on to industrial. You know, with rate expectations in the US moderating, we saw industrial metal prices and junior miner valuations begin to rally. I’ve got a chart of copper futures and the Sprott Junior Copper Miners ETF on screen, but we’ve really seen them start to fall off coming into January. Now, of course, today they’re up a little bit, but not as much as, say, crude. When you look at things like industrial metals, what are you looking at right now and how do you look at, say, the junior miners differently than you look at the raw metals prices themselves?

A graph of stock market

Description automatically generated

Tracy Shuchart


Well, I think really when we’re talking about industrial metals, to me it’s really an h two story of this year rather than h one. I think it’s going to be a little touch and go here because I personally don’t think that they are going to cut rates in March. Right. And I think that would be probably second half of the year. I could totally be wrong on that, but I just don’t really see that happening. I think the market is getting too ahead of themselves. But generally when you see rate cuts, that’s generally better for metals and for metal miners because their projects become a little bit more affordable. You have to understand these miners borrow a lot of money to get these projects off the ground. There’s a lot of financing. There’s also cost of carry, storage, things of that nature for the middleman when you’re talking in commodity markets. So that’s a very rate sensitive environment when you’re looking at borrowing costs that are so large. And so when you start cutting rates, I think that’s going to ease a little bit of that burden and of their bottom line. Also, we likely see USD to come off a little bit that’s always supportive or tends to be supportive of metals.

Tracy Shuchart


And so I think that’s more of an h two story. That said, if we look at something like copper, I’m very bullish on copper. I think that because of the renewable energy push, because of the mining supply disruptions that are going on right now and not coming back, and because of the deficits in the market supply demand deficits, I think as soon as we see rates come down and the dollar back off a little bit, I think that will be very supportive.

Tony Nash


Okay, now how much of your bullish, say, copper story is dependent on demand in 24? Because if we look at Mike’s jobs chart and the indication that a recession is on the way, how much of that is dependent on that innate demand factor versus, say, the EV growth factor and other things.

Tracy Shuchart


I think obviously that would weigh heavily across markets. But when we look at commodities generally, even when we’ve had a recession, like take 2008 over 2020, because that was a totally different kind of environment. But if you look at 2008 and you look at the commodity sector in particular, metals and energy bounced back faster than anything else in the market.

Tracy Shuchart


Because it’s still relatively inelastic. If you look at the energy sector, people still have to go to work, people still have to take their kids to school or to get the bus, or the nation still has to run, even if you’re. So we definitely see those demand numbers bounce back faster than anything else. And the same with industrial metals because manufacturing still happens and the economy still has to run.

Tony Nash


Okay, good. So there’s a baseline there. Okay. And we also saw China PPI numbers way down last night too, or this morning. So as we see those factory gate prices, that probably put some downward pressure on industrial metals as well, I would think, at least in the short term. No? Is that a factor?

Tracy Shuchart


Yeah, absolutely. Everybody looks at China when you’re talking about industrial metals just because of the giant manufacturing hub that they are. Right. So everybody looks at iron ore, everybody looks at copper, everybody looks at all the basic industrial metals that you need for manufacturing steel, for construction and things of that nature. And so I feel like everybody counts on China to sort of save the whole complex. But we are seeing demand in other places springing up in other asian nations, for example. And in Africa they’re coming up, and in India they’re coming up. So though we’re seeing losses out of China, we are seeing gains in demand in other countries.

Tony Nash


Okay, that’s good to know. Okay, thanks for that. So speaking of potential rate rise in March, Albert, let’s talk a little bit about a very interesting topic around central banks. Let’s talk about the Yellen factor. Okay. So just to cover a couple of central banks first, and then we’ll come back to Yellen. We saw earlier this week some test balloons coming out of the bank of Japan saying they’re going to end negative rates. In Q2, the former policy director said they’re completely ready to end negative rates. So one would assume strengthen JPY, which would be, I guess, interesting. And then at the same time, we had kind of who I think is among the world’s worst central bankers. Lagarde saying that Europe is not in a serious recession, which isn’t really all that comforting since she said serious. So it’s kind of a very nothing to see here moment. And she, of course, said the ECB won’t cut rates until they’re sure that inflation is conquered and all this other stuff. And so I think there’s this assumption that the Fed is really in charge of a lot, not just in the US, but globally.

A screenshot of a social media post

Description automatically generated

A black text on a white background

Description automatically generated

Tony Nash


And a lot of these other central banks are dependent on the Fed. But we do have a person in the background who seems quite powerful, who knows both the Fed landscape and the US treasury landscape in Janet Yellen. So can you talk us through Yellen’s role, what she’s doing and kind of the power she has not just over the Fed, but over some of these other central.

Albert Marko


You know, I like to limit the central banks to the US and Anglosphere plus Japan, because those are the only really important ones, the ECB. Yeah, sure. But right now they’re in a zombie status for their economy. Lagarde talks about a serious recession. They’re in a depression right now in Europe. But aside from, you know, Janet Yellen has dialog with all these central banks, so does Powell.

Albert Marko


They sit there and they discuss what policy actions they’re going to throw out there. They don’t surprise one another. Nobody does that, especially in today’s interconnected markets. You can’t think that they act independently anymore. Sure, something could happen overnight and they have to act, react, so on and so forth. But when you’re talking about long term policy, know, the Fed and Yellen will sit there and pick up the phone and talk. I know for a fact they do. I know for a fact that they get information and they prompt the Australian central bank to do so on and so forth with their currency, whether they devalue it or raise rates or so on. And so I mean, Yellen, her desire is to keep the US markets elevated. And right now, it’s purely a political thing. And I know Mike’s going to chime in here a little bit later, but from what I know and plenty of people I talked to, it is purely politics in her eyes. Right. So she’s looking right now to use all of the remaining reverse repo for the election, simply for the election going into Q three. Right now, she’s looking to probably do about $1.2 trillion in bills by Q three, which is absolutely massive.

Albert Marko


And the fact that you said that she knows how things work in the Fed and how things work in the treasury, well, she wants to neuter Powell and the Fed and being able to raise rates and offset any kind of market pumps that she has planned. Right now, 1.2 trillion is at least $200 billion more than even the highest estimates that I’ve seen of anybody else. Right. Because the way I understand it works, that she gets her bills Bonanza, and QT is killed because QT is going to end this year. Right. We can talk about what that happens to inflation for 2024, but Mike is right about 2025 and going onwards, that inflation is probably going to taper off in those years. But for the election, I absolutely think that Yellen double pumps this market and gets the narrative that the economy is good simply by using our reverse repo and all these other narratives that she builds through the other central banks globally.

Tony Nash


Okay, so what is she spending that $1.2 trillion on?

Albert Marko


Honestly, that’s above my pay grade. Right. That really is. I mean, I can tell you what they’re doing. When you talk about the plumbing and the mechanics. Mike probably knows way better than I know that she uses investors in the reverse repo as a prime source of liquidity. Not all of it, but a significant. That’s as much as I know about.

Mike Green


I mean, just to offer a couple of mean one, when we talk about it being all political, it’s always all political.

Mike Green


Let’s just be really clear. The treasury does not have a policy statement that mandates their behavior. And so when the treasury is pursuing something, it is explicitly pursuing something in the interests of the administration.

Albert Marko


That’s exactly right.

Mike Green


It’s actually really important for people to understand. There’s nothing nefarious about that. It’s actually very different if the Fed gets involved and begins pumping a political agenda that may or may not happen. And I’m certain that it happens to a greater degree than we’d like to acknowledge. But the simple reality is she isn’t a member of Biden’s cabinet. Her objective is to push Biden’s agenda. That includes getting Biden reelected, in part because the Biden administration sees the election of Trump as one of the most concerning possible outcomes for the US over and above a traditional election type dynamic. Whether that’s correct or not, that is actually above my pay grade.

Mike Green


Because that requires looking in the future and something that we can’t just see. The second component is when you talk about what she’s going to spend it on, I actually think we largely know what they are going to spend it on.

Mike Green


They’ve already told us the inappropriately named Inflation Reduction act is going to continue to push domestication of supply chains, the investment in critical supply chains component. And that’s been one of the key drivers of the better than expected GDP, is that the US trade deficit has deteriorated or has improved dramatically over the past year or so.

Mike Green


So it’s actually like, I do think those things are important for people to understand relative to GDP. We’ve seen an seeing, you know, largely tied to the dramatic increase in oil production in the United States. We’re seeing the know, the US is now the world’s largest oil product producer, bar none. And that’s happening under a democratic administration.

Mike Green


The whole drill, baby, drill type framework actually occurred under. So I think it’s important to kind of identify that. The last point that I think you guys are emphasizing, which is the use of the RRP or the incentive to not fully fund, effectively drawing down non bank deposit reserves in order to fund the payments that go out from the US government. That is a liquidity. And from that standpoint, I think it’s important for people to understand that when you use bills or you use RRP as your source of financing, you’re using an asset that carries effectively zero volatility weight, right? So if I use 30 year bonds and somebody goes out and buys a 30 year bond to provide financing for the US government, they have to be very cognizant that the value of that bond can vacillate fairly significantly. That creates uncertainties in terms of asset values. That reduces my incentive to go out and spend those proceeds or to continue to spend, because I’m now like, well, I’m not entirely sure what my asset value is.

Mike Green


When you use bills, there’s none of that uncertainty. It actually goes even slightly worse. You don’t even need to put out because bills are discounted mechanisms just make life simple. If I buy a one year bond, yielding one year, bill, yielding 5%. I’m paying ninety five cents, and I’m getting a dollar back in the future that is absolutely cash that is being returned into the system at a lower cost to the system than if I had to fully fund a dollar purchase of a 5% bond, for example.

Mike Green


So all of these things matter. I just think we got to be a little bit careful in, like, this is uniquely Yellen or this is uniquely Manukin or somebody else.

Mike Green


That’s always the objective of the treasury, to serve at the pleasure of the president.

Albert Marko


Yeah. Their liquidity analysis is dubious at best. But the US bubble sucks in so much capital at this point that they may be running out of sources. I don’t know. I mean, $400 trillion is a lot of money. A lot of money to jack.

Mike Green


Nobody can do.

Mike Green


Just to be clear. But 400 billion, not 400 trillion.

Albert Marko


Oh, yeah, sorry. 400 billion.

Mike Green


We’ll get there eventually, don’t worry. The Bitcoiners are telling us that

Albert Marko


Doing liquidity analysis on 430 billion is not easy.

Mike Green


Right. I agree with that. And I also think the other component is. Remember that a lot. This goes back to the narrative type dynamic.

Mike Green


When the stock market goes up, we want to explain why.

Mike Green


And so all sorts of liquidity, blah, blah, blah. Well, liquidity can be used to fund lots of things, including money under the know you like. Just be aware that it doesn’t always mean exactly what people think it means.

Tony Nash


So I want to go back to one thing you mentioned, Albert. You said QT is definitely ending this year. So what, $8 trillion on the fed balance sheet? Something like that.

Albert Marko


The fed balance, more like 12 trillion when you take in all the swaps that they got with other banks and whatnot. But on paper. Yeah. It’s 8 trillion. Yeah. You want to use the paper number? Yeah, it’s 8 trillion.

Tony Nash


Sure. Okay. I guess normally around 2 trillion, something like that. Or at least has been for the past five, six, seven years, something like that. So 8 trillion is the new norm, is that what you’re saying? On the fed balance sheet?

Albert Marko


Yeah. I mean, it’s been elevated, been going up every year. We use excuses now, like Covid and Europe in 2012 and so on and so forth. They’ll find excuses to keep the balance sheet up. I don’t even take that even seriously anymore.

Tony Nash


Okay, Mike, what’s your thought on that?

Mike Green


I’m hopeful that Albert is wrong, but.

Tony Nash


Me, too. I’m on your side.

Tony Nash


I don’t know why they couldn’t continue to siphon it off.

Albert Marko


You know why? Because this is a purely political nonsense. This is the reason why inflation stays elevated and high is because the political policies get in the way of economic common sense. That’s why. Right. There is nothing that the Biden administration has ever shown me that they are willing to do something economically logical. That’s why. Right. That’s purely my baseline of reasoning behind all this.

Tony Nash


I mean, in fairness, we could say the same thing about the last two years of the Trump.

Mike Green


Yeah. I was going to say again, to me, you don’t need to assign one party versus another. Right. They both have behaved in economically irrational manners to prosecute their objectives. Part of it is it’s just that we don’t have a good model that actually explains this. I mean, deficits don’t matter. That comes, you know, from the Reagan and Bush administration.

Mike Green


You know, when I come back, I want to be the bond market.

Mike Green


James Carville with the Clinton administration, there is no political allegiance to any of this stuff. Simple reality is sometimes it matters and sometimes it doesn’t.

Mike Green


And it all depends on where you are in a business cycle and where you are in a capacity utilization cycle, et cetera. And that’s very frustrating for people who always want to hear that two plus two equals four, right? Sometimes it does and sometimes it doesn’t.

Albert Marko


Mike, I had a question for you. One of the main thesis I had is it doesn’t matter because Asia and Europe are just non existent at the moment.

Albert Marko


If we had some kind of counterbalance. Then the United States would have some problems. Right.

Mike Green


I totally agree.

Albert Marko


Yeah. Because they’re dead. Asia is dead right now. Right. Europe is. I don’t even know what Europe is. It’s just a vacation club. Sure, Japan’s different. Japan’s a little bit different. But I’m saying China itself, China and Europe are completely dead. For that reason, we have no accountability.

Albert Marko


Right. We can do whatever we want. I’m not saying it’s good, but in the short term, we can do whatever we want. It’s probably going to bite us in the ass ten years down the line. But for today, who’s going to hold us accountable?

Mike Green


I think in general, again, I think that there’s parts of what Albert’s saying that I absolutely agree with. Right. We all know, including myself, the overweight individual, who knows that there’s consequences associated with being overweight but doesn’t want to change their behaviors.

Mike Green


You can tell them that on Tuesday. You can tell them that on Wednesday. You can tell them that on Thursday and it’s not going to change their behavior. And for that matter, they’re going to sit there and increasingly be like, stop nagging me.

Mike Green


It’s only once they have the catastrophic heart attack and they recognize that there are actually distinct consequences. But at that point, their future as an athlete is finished.

Mike Green


There is like no real opportunity there. So there will be eventually a heart attack that hits for exactly the reasons that Albert’s saying. If we continue to make bad policy and basically consume Twinkies for breakfast. But in the meantime, man, Twinkies are tasty.

Tony Nash


Yeah, they are.

Albert Marko


They’re deep fried Twinkies.

Mike Green


Particularly if you deep fry them. Right, exactly.

Tracy Shuchart


And then cover them in chocolate.

Albert Marko


Yeah, exactly.

Mike Green


Right.

Albert Marko


Because we got them.

Mike Green


And at every stage in that process, somebody’s saying, oh, that doctor doesn’t know what the hell he’s talking about. I’m totally fine. Right. There’s no different with political administrations.

Albert Marko


That’s a perfect analogy. It’s like the Twinkie, deep fried chocolate covered Twinkie. Because we have Ozempic. Yeah. That’s not going to stop the heart disease. Right. Make it look good.

Mike Green


Well, the irony is that if you combine Ozempic and the Twinkie, right. You now have increased consumption and you’ve introduced innovative new technologies that you can value richly. And if they’re paid for with government deficits, that shows up as phenomenal to GDP growth.

Tony Nash


Let me ask you, the Twinkie, Ozempic and testosterone shots since we’re goosing the defense budget.

Mike Green


Right. My gut doesn’t look nearly as bad because I’ve pumped up my upper body. Right. Congratulations.

Tony Nash


So on that Twinkie note, let’s just end it on a happy Twinkie note. Okay.

Mike Green


There we go.

Tony Nash


This is great, guys. We could go on for hours. Thank you so much for this. I really appreciate your time, all the thoughts you put into this. Have a great weekend. Have a great week ahead. Thank you very much.

Tracy Shuchart


Thank you.

Mike Green


Take care.

Categories
News Articles

Best Stock Predictions Software for 2024

Best Stock Prediction Software Reviewed

This article first appeared and was originally published at https://www.techopedia.com/investing/stock-prediction-software.

Stock predictions software gives you insights into which companies to buy or sell. They’re ideal for investors with limited analytical experience or time to actively research the markets. However, not all prediction software yields suitable results, so you’ll need to do your homework.

In this guide, we compare the 8 best stock predictions software for 2024. We consider a wide range of metrics, including prediction accuracy, past performance, insights, trading tools, subscription fees, and supported stock markets.

To make an informed decision on the best stock predictions software for your investing goals, read on. We review the 8 providers listed above – covering performance, accuracy, pricing, and other important factors.

5. CI Markets – Stock Price Predictions on Over 1,600 Assets With a Claimed Accuracy Rate of 94.7%

CI Markets is an advanced stock prediction software that forecasts future price valuations. It covers over 1,600 assets from multiple global markets. This includes stock constituents from the S&P 500, NASDAQ, FTSE 100, and Nikkei 225. CI Markets also covers major, minor, and exotic currency pairs, not to mention futures and commodities.

For each supported asset, CI Markets predicts yearly stock price movements based on monthly interval forecasts. It continuously backtests its theories with historical data from 2010 onwards. According to CI Markets, its stock prediction software has a forecast accuracy rate of 94.7%.

There are three pricing plans to choose from. The free plan is restricted to major currencies and Nikkei stocks. For $99 per month, you’ll get full functionality – including access to all supported assets. The monthly subscription fee is reduced to $50 when you purchase an annual plan.

Stock Software Overview  Devices Price
Price predictions on over 1,600 financial markets, including US and international stocks, forex, commodities, and indices. Monthly interval forecasts enable the software to estimate stock prices over the next 12 months. Claims to have an accuracy rate of 94.7%. Web and mobile browsers. $99 per month. Reduced to $50 per month when purchasing an annual plan. There’s also a free plan but this offers limited features and only tracks major currencies and Nikkei stocks.

Pros 

  • One-year price predictions based on monthly interval forecasts
  • Covers over 1,600 instruments – including stocks, currencies, and commodities
  • Claims to have a 94.7% accuracy rate
  • Optimized for web and mobile browsers

Cons 

  • Doesn’t offer desktop software
  • Free plan only covers major currencies and globaleconomics

Visit CI Markets

Categories
Week Ahead

The US consumer & employment; Turkey’s geopolitical aspirations; and Is nuclear overbought?

The US consumer & employment; Turkey’s geopolitical aspirations; and Is nuclear overbought?

https://youtu.be/PotrPb-VVQk

Welcome 2024 with this brand new episode of The Week Ahead. Joining us for the first time is Neely Tamminga with our regular guests Albert Marko and Tracy Shuchart. Key themes for this episode:

1. The US Consumer & Employment

    Neely, an expert in consumer trends, joins us to explore the financial landscape with a focus on consumers being overextended, multiple jobholders, and the ability to repay debt. She provides valuable insights into the challenges that consumers face.

    Also, she shares her forecasts for January and February, discussing weaker demand optics and potential layoffs, and helps us understand how the 2024 consumption dynamics might impact consumer confidence in this presidential cycle.

    2. Turkey’s Geopolitical Aspirations

    Albert takes us on a geopolitical journey, especially focusing on Turkey. What are the lesser-known aspects of Turkey’s influence in the Middle East and Africa?

    Albert also helps us explore the impact of Turkish defense exports, and the role of Lira devaluation in geopolitical priorities, and understand Turkey’s key bilateral relationships—Russia, China, Iran, Europe, and the US.

    3. Is Nuclear Overbought?

    Tracy brings her expertise to the table to address the lingering question: Is nuclear overbought? Tracy discusses the long-standing fascination with nuclear investments and the recent surge in hedge funds loading up on uranium.

    Tracy explores the reasons behind this bullish trend, questioning whether nuclear is overbought and what insights these funds might possess.

    Transcript

    Tony Nash


    Today we’re joined by Neely Tamminga, Albert Marko and Tracy Shuchart. We’re starting the new year with a great episode and Neely is going to talk to us about the US consumer and employment. We had that jolts data come out yesterday and on Wednesday, actually. And I’m really interested to see what Neely expects in Q1. We’re going to talk about Turkey. Albert has a lot of experience in Turkey, so we’re going to talk through Turkey’s political aspirations and kind of some of the roles they’re playing in the Middle east with Russia and other places. And then with Tracy, we’re going to talk about nuclear. And I’m really curious. I’ve heard about nuclear for years. I’m just wondering, is nuclear overbought at this point? So I’m sure we’re going to make some enemies by having that conversation, but it’ll be a good one to have.

    Tony Nash


    Hey, I’d like to make sure you know that you can access our AI-driven market forecasting tool called CI Markets for free, no strings attached. And it does not require any credit card information. Go to completeintel.com/markets to subscribe. CI Markets is the perfect addition to your analysis toolbox.


    This free account includes Nikkei stocks, major currency pairs and global economics. Of course, we offer much more in our paid account, but this lets you experience CI Markets before making a financial commitment. CI Markets uses the power of AI to help you make better trading investment decisions. It’s absolutely free. Again, go to completeintel.com/markets to subscribe to. CI Markets free.

    So, Neely, thank you for joining us. I’ve been trying to get you on our show for a while and I’m so grateful to have you here. So welcome.

    Neely Tamminga


    Thank you. It’s an honor to be here truly.

    Tony Nash


    Great. Thank you. So one of your key areas is consumer, and I see you tweet about consumers a lot. You recently posted about consumers being overextended and kind of consumers paying bills with multiple jobholder data. Can you walk us through, I’ve got the tweets up on screen. Can you walk us through how loaded up are consumers and how are you seeing the ability to repay debt in the US today?

    A screenshot of a chat

Description automatically generated

    A screenshot of a graph

Description automatically generated

    Neely Tamminga


    It’s precarious for some, it’s easy for others. And I think that’s what is going to be most revealing for this year. We’re asked all the time, how’s the consumer? And our first response is always, well, which consumer do you want to talk about? And that nuance is something that I think that we’re going to have to retrain the market to think through in 2024. Nuance is going to be where the alpha is, and that’s how we’re guiding our own corporate clients as well as some of our other clients that we advise on the investment side. One thing that immediately comes to mind is that debt level, we definitely have some consumers that feel so stretched that they choose to do buy now, pay later, or some people call buy now, pay never. Right? And it’s still an unproven mode. It’s still an unproven debt. It’s still unproven. And we’ve seen this way back in history before. Talking with another fellow Twitter friend recently, reminiscing, if you can call it reminiscing around, just like when Providian fell apart and the next card fell apart way back in the day. It kind of feels like by now, pay later might be that next wave.

    Neely Tamminga


    So it just depends. It depends on the consumer.

    Tony Nash


    Okay. So just to dig into that a little bit, so obviously, I feel like on social media, we see a lot of people who are probably doing pretty well talking about the consumer in theory, not the consumer in reality, right? And if we look at, say, some restaurant, like a chili’s or something like that, right. These were places not to pick on chili’s, but these were places that through 21 and 22, they could pass on inflation to customers, right? The job market was healthy, so kind of their target market was seeing pay rises, not passive ones, but they were enough to keep up with some of that inflation. And so now we’re seeing those pay rises. Stop. We’re seeing the job switching. Stop. We’re seeing the ability of those companies to be able to pass inflation on to their customers. Stop. And my question, we talk about this fairly regularly, is will there be margin compression coming to hurt those companies, and will there also be demand kind of diffusion, because those customers may not be able to keep up with that consumer spend, given the debt loads that you’re talking about.

    Neely Tamminga


    It’s a great question. And we actually are watching restaurants very closely for signs on discretionary spending here in the month of January. If you rewind, a year ago January, restaurant retail sales were off the chain. They were so strong. And we think it really contributed from two different factors. If you go back, that’s when we saw, like a high single digit cost of living increase among 66 million baby boomer retirees. That easily led to an incremental trip to get their baby back ribs right at Chili’s.

    Tony Nash


    Cracker barrel or whatever. Right?

    Neely Tamminga


    Right. The OG Olive Garden did really well last year in the first quarter, cruise bookings were really strong. I mean, things like this that are very much boomer centric. I’m sure someone’s got a boomer ETF somewhere. Right. And I’m sure it did really well. But overall, what we would say is the other thing was that it was really warm in January last year. Like really warm. So it extended a lot of the ability for those restaurants that might have had outdoor seating. They were able to extend it into that month as well. So we’re watching for the January numbers this year from a comparable perspective. The cost of living increase is closer to a low single digit this year. We all know that doesn’t totally keep up with what the cost of consumption is, right. Know at least the perceived cost of consumption. And we’re kind of curious to see if this is going to be a little bit of the breakage. There is one more thing at play that’s not boomer related per se, Tony, and that’s we’ve had this tiny little quiet, no one’s talking about it, payment pause on the student loans.

    Neely Tamminga


    Even over the last two months, you can see it. We’ve also tweeted about that student loan, student loan repayment. And it’s because some of the payment processors were unable to meet some of the needs and demands of restarting after, what, 43 consecutive months of not paying. We think that there’s easily eight to 9 million people that have just not been paying that might have to go back into repayment in January as well. So there’s a couple of different factors that work against consumer spending and discretionary spending specifically that we could see play out in January. So we’re watching it really closely.

    Tony Nash


    That’s a great point. You have another tweet. I want to talk about luxury in a minute, but you have another tweet where you talked about consumers feeling optimistic and you talk about some reasons why things might be different in the coming year. You’ve covered some of these things. The cola increases, especially in Social Security. ERTC monies were flowing freely. Consumer spending hangover is more substantial post this holiday. Interest rates, early tax refunds in February, all this other stuff. Right. So can you talk us through a little bit of that list and those things? I think each one of them on their own would, I think, cause some concern in markets. But those things accumulated, as you said, with the student loans. I’m not sure that we got like a fourth Q GDP now estimate yesterday. That was just really stellar. And I think there’s this assumption that these things are going to keep moving. I’m not a doomer, but at some point these things cause concern. Right?

    Neely Tamminga


    They do. And I think that’s know, I still go back to Danielle DiMartino Booth had a great interview well over a year ago, and I had the privilege of asking her a question around what is it that you would see that you don’t necessarily fully, what is it that you don’t know that worries you? And she said private credit went to places it didn’t belong or something paraphrased to that effect. And I think the same is true with consumer. You won’t see it till it kind of blows up. I mean, the consumer loves to spend. It’s a dopamine hit. Right. Even if you go back to 2008, I was recently reviewing all the retail sales data right before the Lehman crash. Right. And retail sales were robust. It was really strong the month before Lehman fell apart. And then it wasn’t until you saw the job loss that people started to pull back on spending. So I think the consumer, unfortunately, will just be spending all the way in to whatever this is.

    Tony Nash


    Right.

    Neely Tamminga


    So looking for consumer spending as an optimistic leading indicator is not necessarily historically the right way to go. But you’re right, we’re concerned about a lot of little cuts to the consumer, whether it’s the student loan payments, the lower Cola. People forget that tax refunds came a lot earlier last year in February. So a lot of people were flushed with the optics of cash in February. And they spent it.

    Neely Tamminga


    That’s not going to be there this February, or at least it’ll be comparable. And then heaven forbid we have to actually have higher taxes on the other side of this political season. So we haven’t even talked about what’s going on with the election.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah. Oh, we can talk about that for hours. Let’s talk about luxury for a minute, because Albert talks about luxury quite a lot. And I know he’s outside and it’s windy and people are going to complain about his sound quality on the show. But can you give us your view of luxury? And Albert, can you jump in here? Because know, Albert looks at watches, know luxury watch prices and all this stuff, and gives us observations on what’s happening in Florida at the different luxury stores. What are you seeing in luxury? Like, is it pretty resilient? Are things falling off? What’s happening there?

    Neely Tamminga


    I think I probably see Albert’s posts about it maybe is know there’s that infamous, like the Rolex watch right. Sort of indicators that you, Albert, it probably is. That’s obviously rolling over. But some of the luxury brands, even this fall, were signaling that they were starting to see kind of a slowdown in their business. And I think some people just immediately think like, oh, luxury doesn’t ever slow. And there’s some truth to that. The higher end consumer is fine. I mean, they will spend when they want to spend and how they want to spend it. It’s the aspirational, incremental customer that aspired into that brand that is now gone. And so in some ways, that slowdown of people who had maybe been flush with the employee retention tax credit money and now they don’t have it, it’s that incremental customer going away that you could start to see some things fall apart in luxury core high end consumer, truly high end people who don’t quiet luxury consumers, they’re fine. They’re absolutely fine. I don’t see any issue there. It’s the marginal customer around the brands that we would want to be on watch.

    Tony Nash


    And that’s really where these brands intended provide their additional value. Right. I mean, those core consumers are going to be there regardless, but it’s those aspirational ones. That’s a great point. Albert, what’s your thought on that?

    Albert Marko


    No, she’s absolutely right. Especially in the beginning when she started talking about the nuanced numbers of consumer spending. 10% of the consumers are spending, probably around 40% of the spending. It’s absolutely astronomical right now, and it transfers over to the luxury market. And Neely’s right, those marginal customers are gone. Those people that were flushed with money a year, two years ago, their accounts are dwindling and now they’re just trying to service their debts that they accumulated to combat that. I saw that Rolex and a couple other luxury brands like Blancpain and Brunello Cucinelli rose their prices in Europe 8%. It was just like two days ago, Rolex announced that everything in the UK now is 8% more. So they’re going to slow down their production, whether it’s watches, clothing, luxury cars, they’re going to try to slow down production and raise their prices just to offset it. But, yeah, I mean, the luxury market, although I am bullish for 2024 only because I know there’s an election and there’s going to be money flying around everywhere, but long term, it’s not pretty.

    Tony Nash


    So it sounds like almost a harder market segmentation than we’ve had for the last few years, like when there’s loose monetary policy market segmentation kind of blurs, but now there’s almost some hard edges coming in that segmentation. Is that fair to say?

    Albert Marko


    Yeah, but it transcends everything. It’s just like all the normal applications of what you would do to look at fundamental economics in the markets previously is absolutely not the case after Covid. Now that we’re in a total different time zone, total different era, things are more political than they are economic and financial at the moment.

    Tony Nash


    Right. Okay, great. Now before we wrap this up, I want to talk a little bit about jobs. We had some jolts. Data come out and Neely, obviously with consumption, jobs is always paired with that pretty tightly. What are your views on jobs and layoffs and other things in Q1? Are we going to see some serious slowdown there? Okay.

    Neely Tamminga


    Yeah, I think for. Oh, somehow.

    Tony Nash


    That’s all right.

    Neely Tamminga


    Somehow that went there. Hi.

    Albert Marko


    Okay.

    Neely Tamminga


    For us on jobs, jobs, of course, are always like the classically lagging. Right. It’s not a leading indicator, but there are some interesting things that we’ve been posting about which could be somewhat of a leading indicator. So for example, multiple job holders, some people will push back and say, we’re not insignificantly more in multiple job holders than we’ve been historically. Okay, that’s fine relative to total employed. But you might want to look at multiple job holders per continuing claims. That’s going to tell you something, right? Because it’s delightful. I actually love the consumer. I mean, having led the consumer research practice at Piper Jaffery, which is now Piper Sandler, for many, many years, took a dozen companies public, spent 20 years on the sell side. Right. I love the consumer. It has fueled and funded my future. And the consumer is extremely resilient and they care deeply about paying their bills. Sometimes I think we paint them in a picture that they don’t. They will go work multiple jobs to put food on the table for their family. And so you’ve got to look at that multiple job holders relative to where continuing claims are.

    Neely Tamminga


    Because if they lose that second job, they will not be able to file a claim, typically on initial claims. So initial claims isn’t what you want to look at. You want to look at continuing claims to see will we be able to reabsorb them or not into the job market. And it’s a pretty decent leading indicator, similar to jolts with the quits data. If you look at quits relative to continuing claims, it’s a similar sort of dynamic high correlation with the unemployment rate. If you look at those factors together. And again, that’s been rolling over. So multiple job holders rolling over quits per continuing claim. Rolling over. Unemployment is probably going to move higher not just because of people unable to be laid off and unable to find their job, but we actually have people who are probably coming off the sidelines and expanding that labor force denominator as they unretire in order to pay bills as well. So I think there’s a lot of little things in that, but they’re going to do it so that they can consume, which is why consumption kind of doesn’t fall apart until the economy falls apart.

    Tony Nash


    Right. So would you say it’s notable but not concerning yet? Something like that.

    Neely Tamminga


    Correct. Yeah. We’re not in a camp that’s like, oh, it’s totally tight. No, there’s actually signs that things are loosening if you look at different sort of indicators. The question is for how long and can government fiscal spending support it? A lot of job growth has come from either direct or related government spending.

    Albert Marko


    And that’s another question I have is now you hear the soft landing versus some saying no landing scenarios. And I can’t see that happening in 2024. I still think that the government can float it up until at least after the election. But this soft landing, no landing scenario, it’s not plausible with all this loose money that’s still sloshing around.

    Neely Tamminga


    Albert, I think the one thing I got wrong all last year was the political will to extend. Right? That’s what I got wrong last year. If I were to say, what did you get wrong, Neely? Because we were definitely bears because of the student loan repayment. It’s a big deal. The political will to keep people from paying their student loans is just palpable. And that’s going to continue all the way up until September 2024. It is an election issue again. Yeah.

    Albert Marko


    Without question. It’s not just you. I’ve been in politics for God knows how many decades. Right. And even I was taken aback about how venomly opposed they were to letting the markets show weakness. I thought, okay, for sure, we’re going to have a soft recession or some minimal recession for like a month. They are absolutely not okay with that happening on the run up to this election. That’s just the bottom line.

    Tony Nash


    So the political will to spend other people’s money is pretty strong, is that what you’re saying?

    Albert Marko


    Yeah. You can see it. Of course.

    Tony Nash


    Tracy, can you help us on the consumer side before we jump to the next topic in terms of gasoline consumption, airline travel, these sorts of things, are you seeing softness there? Because we’re not really going to talk much about oil prices. But are you seeing softness in gasoline consumption and crude consumption in the US? Based on some of the things that Neely’s talking about? You’re on mute.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Actually, if we look at oil demand in the US, we really haven’t seen a change yet. In fact, it’s even higher than 2019 levels. And everybody, even the EIA, every year when they do, their short term energy outlook has been underestimating demand. And when they go back and give their 914 report, they have to go ahead and say, we’re sorry. Demand is actually higher than we thought. And so in the US, we’re just not seeing that. But again, when you have to look at gasoline and other demand, it’s fairly resistant to even economic downturns because it’s somewhat inelastic. Yes, people will stop going on vacations and driving on vacations and things of that nature.

    Tony Nash


    Going to Applebee’s.

    Tracy Shuchart


    But you still have to get your kids to school, you still have to go to work. So some of that demand is relatively inelastic. And what we have seen in the US is that we have seen demand continue to rise. And of course, since gas prices have, even though they are higher than, say, in 2016 era, they’re still lower than they were. And so this is also helping spur demand further. So we’re just not seeing that.

    Tracy Shuchart


    But again, like I said, even if we look at the great financial crisis in 2008, oil demand was the first commodity to rebound out of the first of anything to rebound because people went back to work after all the markets shit the bed, pardon my french, but it was the first thing to rebound. So again, I go back to the fact that part of this demand is relatively inelastic. I mean, we’re a big country. Everybody drives to work. Everybody has to put their kids on the bus to go to school or drive them to school. Know, there are just things that we need to do to function as a society in the US.

    Tony Nash


    So what point in election season, if we continue to see lower gas prices, do we hear people say things like, oh, low gasoline prices are a tax cut, which is the biggest joke. Will we hear those words this year?

    Tracy Shuchart


    Of course you’re going to hear that. We heard that forever. That’s not new. You hear that just on interim elections. You hear that from congressmen, senators and even your local congressmen. Of course you’re going to hear that. It’s a tax break.

    Tony Nash


    It’s not, but it is. That’s what people. So, okay, good thanks guys. This on consumption of jobs is fantastic.

    Tony Nash


    About a new free tier we have within CI Markets, our global market forecasting platform. We want to share the power of CI markets with everyone, so we’ve made a few things free. First, economics. We share all of our global economics forecasts for the top 50 economies. We also share our major currency forecasts as well as Nikkei 100 stocks. So you can get a look at what do our stock forecasts look like? There is no credit card required. You can just sign up on our website and get started right away. So check it out. CI Markets Free. Look at the link below and get started ASAP. Thank you.

    Tony Nash


    Fantastic. Let’s change completely to talk about turkey. Albert, you have a lot of exposure and experience in Turkey. You wrote a piece on your cloak and dagger patron called the geopolitical roundup looking at 2024. We talk about us, politics, Turkey, the Middle East, China, multipolarity, Russia, the EU, kind of everything. One of the items that I really thought was interesting was your discussion of turkey.

    Tony Nash


    And I really don’t believe that turkey is well covered by western media for a lot of different reasons. So can you talk us through a few items about turkey? How big of an influence does turkey have on the Middle east and Africa? Let’s cover that one first.

    Albert Marko


    Well, look at a map. All roads go through Turkey, especially through that region of the world. Wheat, oil, gas, all of it goes to the phosphorus, so on and so mean. You know, the Turks and the Russians have always been at odds with one another in the Black Sea, especially the whole Iranian dynamic with smuggling roots, too, there. It’s a complex topic that. Probably not for this discussion, but the Turks are ambitious. Their economy is struggling mightily at the moment, but with cheap Russian fuel, they’re at least keeping their head afloat at the moment with Turkey. Turkey has a lot of problems, right? But their defense sales are booming. Their mission in Africa to establish trade routes is booming. Completely unopposed by Europe and the United States. Completely. And they’re actually working hand in hand with Russians and Iranians in some sectors of the continent. It’s actually quite amazing to me that no one in the media dares touch turkey at the moment. I don’t know why. I don’t know. Maybe because they’re a NATO member and the Biden administration doesn’t really want to broach that topic at the moment. Obviously, all the western countries are opposed to Erdogan, but he only has, realistically two years left before he leaves his illness.

    Tony Nash


    We saw, I guess, what, 1015 years ago, Qatar was putting a huge amount of money in Egypt and parts of Africa and then things that fell apart and then the UAE came in and kind of took over a lot of those investments. So is there some continuity from Qatar to UAE to Turkey? Is Turkey kind of filling in the hole maybe that the UAE had once or are they filling a different need there?

    Albert Marko


    Turkey is actually facilitating an anti west settlement program to incorporate Iranian trade. Right. They’re discussing on trying to stay away from the dollar and doing some little digital settlement program that’s probably going to fall apart. But you can see the ambition there in Ankara’s eyes. They want to be the dominant player. And on top of that, Qatar has been sending cash payments to Turkey. Whenever they get to the point where their economy is about to falter, plain loads of cash just ships right in through Turkey. So there’s obviously an importance there that the whole region sees.

    Tony Nash


    Interesting. So Qatar is helping Turkey to stabilize economically.

    Albert Marko


    Yeah. Because Turkey has military base there with troops in Qatar.

    Tony Nash


    Right.

    Neely Tamminga


    Can I ask Albert a question about this?

    Tony Nash


    Absolutely.

    Neely Tamminga


    If memory serves, wasn’t the big earthquake like a year ago?

    Albert Marko


    Yeah, it was just a year ago.

    Neely Tamminga


    So is that who’s been coming in and helping them rebuild or has there been some kind of natural disaster diplomacy that is not really being spoken of over here too that supports that? I mean, that was pretty disasters.

    Albert Marko


    Yeah. Luckily it was in a rural area of. Yeah, they had a huge amount of people lost, but it could have been a lot worse if it hit Istanbul. But yeah, there is a lot of corporations coming in that are Dubai or Qatar linked. Most likely know, white companies that are just labeled under Qatar domains. And, you know, everybody but the United States seems to want to help Turkey to gain favor. And again, it’s one of these complete failures of us foreign policy that we’ve seen for 30 years.

    Tony Nash


    Okay, great. So kind of moving into that a little bit, you mentioned that Turkey has a base in Qatar. The US also has a base in Qatar. Are there other bases, other major military installations in Qatar?

    Albert Marko


    Relevant ones? Probably not. I mean, I’m sure the Saudis have something there. Even off the top of my head, I can’t even tell you because only ones I would focus on is the US and Turkey at the moment only because Turkey. I’ve been in and out of Turkey doing business for the last few years.

    Tony Nash


    Okay. Interesting. Now, we’ve heard a lot about Turkish lear devaluation and lack of stability in Turkey’s economy. Can you talk to us a little bit about that? Is there hope on the horizon. Is Turkey stabilizing? It’s interesting you mentioned that Doha is sending money into Turkey, which I didn’t know about. So is there hope on the horizon for stability in Turkey?

    Albert Marko


    Yeah, but it’s ten years out really, because the reality is the Lira is just tanking. It’s going to be weak for the next decade. Right. But on the flip side, all business through their banks and on the street is done in dollars anyways. So what are they really hurting? Probably not a lot. I mean, obviously the bottom 75%, nobody cares about them and the government, but the top 25 and the businesses are all dealing with euros and dollars. They don’t really see lira problems.

    Tony Nash


    Okay. So they’re trying to facilitate. Turkey is trying to facilitate transactions in Africa, in Iranian Riyals, but they’re spending us dollars on the street in Istanbul.

    Albert Marko


    Yeah, of course. I mean, the Chinese do the same thing, but on the flip side, they’ll lend out Renminbi and they ask for dollars back.

    Tony Nash


    Okay, let’s also look at what are Turkey’s closest bilateral relationships? I know that they’ve had a troubled past with Russia, but what is that relationship, aside from kind of the oil relationship now, is there a true bilateral relationship there, or is it really just kind of an opportunistic economic relationship?

    Albert Marko


    It’s completely opportunistic. They have issues with Iran, Russia, and the EU and the Black Sea area. It’s all they have mentioned before. It’s always been a problem. It always will be a problem of all four of those players trying to dominate that area. So the only relationships they have, realistically are with long standing with Germany. Although contentious at times, that’s one of the biggest communities outside of Turkey.

    Tony Nash


    Okay. And just for the people who don’t know, you really have to look at Ottoman history and Russian history and a lot of the fighting they did to really understand why that antagonism is so deep seated. So you say Germany and Turkey has a tight bilateral relationship, is that right?

    Albert Marko


    Yes.

    Tony Nash


    Okay. And that’s largely because of the migrants that went from Turkey to Germany in the 1970s and have continued since then.

    Albert Marko


    Yeah. Erdogan has even visited Turkey, Turkish communities in Germany multiple times.

    Tony Nash


    Okay, then what about China? Does Turkey have a good relationship with China?

    Albert Marko


    Yes and no. They view the Chinese with skeptical eyes. I mean, obviously they’re not going to give up their key forts to Chinese outfits like the Greeks did. They’re not that desperate for money at the moment.

    Tony Nash


    Okay. And go ahead.

    Tracy Shuchart


    I have a question. We’re looking at Russia right now, wants to kind of build this very large natural gas hub in Turkey. So what, if any, do you see this being a problem with Turkey being a part of, you know, obviously Russian sanctions know all energy. So do you foresee this being a problem if Russia does decide to have kind of turkey be this big natural gas hub for them?

    Albert Marko


    No, I mean, let’s just be realistic. How do you replace Turkey if you want to have any kind of defense or offensive capabilities into the, this, all this chatter know we should kick Turkey out. It’s not sensical. It’s not going to happen. I don’t care how many LNG ports they build over there in the Bosphorus, whether it’s Chinese, Russian or from Pluto, nobody cares. It’s just the fact of the matter is that they’re always going to be in NATO.

    Tony Nash


    Speaking of that a little bit, Albert, Turkey does have quite a lot of defense exports, especially with UAVs. Do they compete with the Chinese for defense exports in places like Africa?

    Albert Marko


    Of course. But nobody likes the chinese stuff. It doesn’t work. It’s too cheap. It’s not been proven in combat. The Bayraktar’s, which is the turkish drones, are well proven. Great pricing. I think they run for like 20,25 million a piece and it’s hard to beat.

    Tony Nash


    Okay, so I remember last question on Turkey. I remember reading, I don’t know, 20 years ago or whatever, George Friedman wrote this book called the next hundred years and he said that there would be a re kind of assertion of kind of the Ottoman empire through Turkey, and Turkey would be one of the big geopolitical players in this century. Do you see that happening? Can Turkey really get it together to be a major geopolitical player this century?

    A white text on a white background

Description automatically generated

    Albert Marko


    No, not this century or next century. Their economy is, like I said, barely afloat. Their military, although somewhat decent next to their borders. They have no logistical capabilities whatsoever and they have no leverage outside of know being geographically.

    Tony Nash


    Okay, interesting. Okay, very good. Thanks for that. I want to come back to Turkey occasionally because it’s so interesting. And again, I think it’s so misunderstood in the west that I think it’s a really important conversation for us to have. So thanks for that, Albert. Tracy, I want to talk to you about something that is, I think probably going to make me unpopular and may make you unpopular is nuclear. I think the nuclear guys, they’re not quite as adamant as the crypto guys, but they’re probably as adamant as gold guys. So we’ve seen nuclear push up quite a lot lately. I’ve heard people pumping nuclear for years it’s an obsession for people. I think over the past couple of years we’ve seen countries like Belgium and Japan claim that they’ll revisit plants to open nuclear plants. And we saw with the earthquake in Japan this week that because of the safety protocols that were put in post Fukushima, that the nuclear plants were safe during the earthquake, which I think is really a good sign for reopening in Japan. So this week you posted a tweet on hedge funds loading up on uranium, which is interesting, and we’ve heard this story for a long time.

    A screenshot of a social media post

Description automatically generated

    Tony Nash


    We’ve also got a screenshot of the uranium price. The uranium ETF obviously popped up in 21 and 22, and we recently saw a top. So I guess my question is, why are all these funds so bowled up on uranium? Like, is the near term prospect for uranium as positive as many of the people have been pumping for the last probably four years?

    A graph with blue lines

Description automatically generated

    Tracy Shuchart


    All right, well, you have to look back at the history of uranium. It’s been a very difficult trade. It’s had its ups and downs. It’s had its ins and outs over the last 30 years or so. So this is not new for uranium to see this kind of price action. That said, I do think that we’ve hit kind of a new phase or a new nuance in this particular market about that. We can cut that out. All right, let me restart. So I think we have hit this new phase or nuance in this particular area. Now, do I think that prices may in the near term have gotten away from us a little bit? Yes, perhaps. But that’s a good thing overall because what we’re going to start seeing is that a lot of these projects, we are in a deficit. Let’s start with it. We are in a deficit because even though the west has largely shunned since Fukushima and Chernobyl, we have had Asia pick up the slack. And I mean, that’s where most of this demand and most of these new nuclear facilities have been scheduled to either have been started or are under construction or plans under construction.

    Tracy Shuchart


    And so that really hasn’t changed. It’s really been kind of the west having this very negative thing about this. And what really changed this, I think notably this year was COP 28, when nuclear was finally brought into the fold in talking about the green transition, because we haven’t seen that. Right.

    Tracy Shuchart


    We saw in COP 27, we saw natural gas finally brought into the fold, and then finally we saw nuclear brought into the fold. In COP 28, we had over 25 nations kind of sign up saying we’re going to triple nuclear energy capacity by 2050. Now, I would like to remind people this is totally an impossibility, logistically speaking, but the mere fact that they have signed up for this is a very positive sign for the nuclear industry, for the west in particular. And so I think that’s very good. Looking forward. I also think that we’ve been in a deficit, even though we haven’t seen this reflected in crisis, because again, largely the west has disregarded this technology and or shut it down. Like, look at Germany, for example. So I think that we’ve seen a new turning point. Do I think that this market’s going know prices are going to continue to skyrocket higher? I do think there’s room to the upside. Do I think we’re going to see a pullback at some point? Yes, because we have had such an escalation in prices. That said, if you’re an investor, instead of kind of wanting to chase prices, uranium prices higher here, maybe wait for that pullback there, but maybe start looking into junior miners.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Right? Junior miners are miners that I would look at. Miners that are already permitted. Right. They don’t have to go through this hassle. They already have drilled holes, so they already know what they’re looking at. They’re ready to go. Right. As soon as these prices hit, and as soon as we started hitting above, say, 65, we started seeing junior miners say, oh, we can kind of get our projects off the ground now because we can make money at this. And so I think that’s a really underlooked area at this point because we’ve seen CCJ and all the big obvious ones explode along with uranium prices last year, and they did extremely well. But I think in this new phase of things, in these new higher prices, what you’re going to see is you’re going to see the juniors doing more well. And I’m not saying CCJ is not going to do well, but I’m saying you’re not going to see the 80% increase that you did. Probably in 2023, you’ll see a lot less increase. And I think there’ll be a lot more interest in junior minors again, but be very selective of the minors that you’re choosing.

    Tracy Shuchart


    You don’t want people that are. I’m just trying to get my permit now. That’s going to take ten years. It’s going to take billions of dollars. It’s going to be over. You want miners that are literally ready to go.

    Tony Nash


    So that’s great. Thank you for that.

    Albert Marko


    I have a question, Tony, I have a question, maybe a statement. I don’t expect Tracy to answer this, but how much of this investment drive for uranium nuclear is predicated off of the failure of alternative energies, renewable energies hidden lately because we’ve seen wind power fluctuate significantly, we’ve seen solar power problems and supply chain problems and the cost going up. So I’m just curious if you have any insight.

    Tracy Shuchart


    I don’t have exact figures, Albert, but it’s great that you brought that up because I absolutely agree. And the confirmation of this was cop 28 when we finally saw it because we’ve already seen or said this year, right, we saw demons this year and then just yesterday we saw BP and know dump out of wind. And so I think people have seen this coming again. I don’t know the exact percentage, but I would say that a lot is predicated on that. Absolutely.

    Tony Nash


    If nuclear capacity is going to expect it to come online at some point, who is making these nuclear plants? I would assume it’s the French, the Japanese and the Chinese, is that right? Who actually constructs nuclear.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Know, it depends actually South Korea, even Bangladesh, believe it or, you know, it’s a lot of Asian countries know obviously that. China of course. But I think that you’re going to see renewed interest in the US, particularly because the US is talking about banning Russian geranium imports, which accounted for about 25% of our uranium imports. And so if they are going to ban that, then where are we going to get this? So I think there’s going to be a, you can do Australia, you can do Kazakhstan, you can do their other places too. But why not get it from North America, right? Because you have some really great companies that we’re looking at not only in Canada but also in the US that have some great projects on the line.

    Tony Nash


    It’s interesting, over the past few months we talked about kind of the cost of debt associated with building new kind of green projects. And obviously the cost of debt associated with nuclear projects would be different or would be similar. But the lifespan of a nuclear project is quite long, right? You’re talking 50 years or something.

    Tracy Shuchart


    You’re talking decades. I mean, we have nuclear facilities that are 50 years old that we just expanded another 20 years. I mean, so far we haven’t really found an end to them. And those were facilities that were literally built 50 years ago. Technology has obviously advanced further at this point. And again, you have to look at companies. I just want to keep stressing this and I know I have three times already, but you want it to have companies that are already permitted, that have already drilled, that already know what, that literally are ready to go because the other ones are going to take decades really to get the projects off the ground. And that’s being realistic as far as just looking at permitting a loan is concerned.

    Neely Tamminga


    Yeah. I would love to ask Tracy a question about this. I am not an energy expert by any stretch, but I think we do need to bring it back to politics for just a hot minute. Right. And that is executive Order 13990, I think ultimately has been like the line in the sand against fossil fuel drilling and production that President Biden signed into. It was easily, I think, his first twelve executive orders he signed in when he took office. And what happens if we have a contender that moves over from the Democrats to the republican side? Do you think that’s going to be one of the first executive orders that gets eradicated and then all of a sudden the fossil fuel companies are back in business again? I think through from a board of directors perspective, could you green light big capital spending projects in fossil fuels if you have a political will against you? What happens when that political will is eradicated and removed? I’m just kind of curious, your perspective on the political component of that.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Yeah, on the political side of things, I think that nobody wants to go 100% into fossil fuels, politically speaking. Nobody’s going to do that except for, say, Senator Manchin, that he’s West Virginia pole, whatever. But I don’t think that is politically kind of a platform you want to run on. And so I don’t think that we would see a complete 180 on this and it would be all just fossil fuels again because that would be politically going against half the country. It would be politically going against what the entire world or what the entire west is kind of looking at. So I don’t think anybody’s going to run on, I mean, you know, I don’t think anybody’s politically going to run on completely. Let’s forget renewables, right?

    Albert Marko


    Yeah. You would need the Republicans to take majority both in the House, Senate and the White House to be able to push something like that. And even then the numbers would have to be so high that it would stop any kind of veto. So it’s going to be a while before fossil fuels will come back into favor in DC.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah. The other consideration we talked about is that cost of debt and almost the substitutional factor with green power generation. Right. And so as terrible as this sounds, I think it’s really interesting how interest rates have brought some kind of reason back to the alternative energy space, and we’re looking at the return on investment. So nuclear is. So for the people who hate me for what I said about nuclear earlier, nuclear does have a lifespan of decades. So there seems to be really good value for money there compared to some things like wind and some other things that have really been hyped. And I don’t hate wind, but I just am not really sure that it’s there in terms of what do you do with the used blades, all this other stuff that are just really complicated issues.

    Tracy Shuchart


    And the same with solar as well. Look at solar panels. And I understand that there are many companies that are trying to figure out ways to reuse and recycle these products, but ultimately, it’s very hard to separate these metals from each other after they’ve been fused together. And the big startup companies that have already started this kind of have pulled back on this even and said, well, maybe we can’t. Maybe we had two ambitious schools at the beginning. So I think the reality is just starting to set in and it’s not cheaper. If you look at the big countries, Germany, particularly in Europe, their energy prices haven’t come down even as their share of renewable have gone up in their overall energy consumption profile.

    Tony Nash


    Yep. Very good, guys. Thank you so much. We have covered such a range of stuff today. It’s amazing. So we got the first one for the year all done. So thank you so much. Neely, really appreciate you joining us. You’ve brought an amazing perspective on consumers. And Albert and Tracy, as always, thank you so much for your time and all your thoughts and have a great week ahead. Thank you.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Thanks guys.

    Albert Marko


    Thank you.

    Categories
    Podcasts

    Global Elections 2024: A Year of Political Significance

    This podcast was first and originally published by Peter Lewis’ Money Talk. Find the Substack here:

    https://peterlewismoneytalk.substack.com/p/peter-lewis-money-talk-thursday-4-be5

    Topics discussed:

    • The upcoming Taiwan election and its potential impact on Taiwan-China relations, with observations on the evolving stance of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
    • The potential weakening of democratic institutions globally, influenced by factors such as economic success, illiberalism, and the impact of the pandemic.
    • The involvement and engagement of young people in politics are considered, with emphasis on their potential interest in national elections and the impact on their lives.
    • The possibility of a Trump presidency, its potential implications, and the dynamics within the Republican party are also discussed, including the potential influence of the primaries.

    ✅ Create and forecast your own investment portfolios.
    ✅ 94.7% market forecast accuracy.
    ✅ 1,600+ assets forecasted every week.

    Subscribe to CI Markets for free. Learn more.

    Transcript

    Peter Lewis


    I’m joined now by Tony Nash, who is founder of Complete Intelligence over in Texas in the USA. Very good morning, Tony. Happy New year to you.

    Tony Nash


    Hi, Peter. Happy New year.

    Peter Lewis


    Thank you. Looking forward to 2024. Lots of things to talk about, but I think one of the things that’s going to be interesting is elections this year is going to be dominated by elections in a way in which we haven’t seen before. Eight of the ten most populous countries in the world are going to hold elections. More than 70 countries, about 2 billion people, half the adult population of the globe, is going to have the chance to vote in 2024. It’s a record for one year. This is going to be pretty important, isn’t it? And we got some pretty significant ones, maybe starting with one in just a few days time in Taiwan.

    Tony Nash


    Right. Yeah, it’s a really interesting year. And the Taiwan election is also very interesting with the DPPKMT and some other things happening there. I think it’ll be interesting to see if there’s a clear winner and who it is. It’s also interesting to see the mainland’s discussion around the Taiwan election, too, which they do this every election. Right. So here in the US, there’s a lot made about the mainland discussion around Taiwan, but this is something that we see every election cycle.

    Peter Lewis


    It seems to be, though, the rhetoric seems to be ratcheting up this time, doesn’t it? Because this is going to be now, if the DPP wins, the Democratic Progressive Party, it’s going to be their third victory in a row, really broke the stranglehold that the KMT used to have on elections in Taiwan. So it feels like this one in particular is going to be very significant and is going to have some implications for markets as well, as. Well, of course, as relations between Taiwan and China. Mainland China.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah, it could be significant. I don’t necessarily get the sense that the DPP is as kind of polar opposite of, say, KMT nationalism as they have been in the past. I think the DPP’s moderated just a little bit. Of course, they don’t want unification, but they’ve moderated just a little bit. I think they’ve come a little bit more to the center. And so I think that’s why they’re appealing, and that’s why it’s possible that they have a third term. I think it makes the mainland a little bit uncomfortable. But again, I think this is not something that is completely unique, although it’s ratcheting up. The other thing to remember, and I know your listeners in Asia will know this. But Taiwan has really only had direct elections since the 1990s. And so we hear a lot about kind of the democracy in Taiwan versus the mainland, but there really hasn’t been direct elections for more than 30 years. So it’s really interesting to see how Taiwan has really gravitated to that and how they do elections incredibly well.

    Peter Lewis


    I mean, these are proper democratic elections, aren’t they? Unlike maybe in some of the countries that are going to hold elections this year where it’s either already a foregone conclusion or do you get the feeling, though, that maybe there is a bit of a recession going on in democracies around the world, that maybe there’s this spreading sort of illiberalism and a weakening of democracy around the world?

    Tony Nash


    Well, I think a couple of factors have played into that. I think the economic success that we’ve seen in the mainland over the last 30 years has really contributed to, say, I would say maybe an academic and maybe media and other, say, political institutional view that maybe a less liberal approach. And we could even look at Singapore, where people look at a potentially less liberal approach as one that maybe gets more economic success. At least that’s some of the perception. I don’t necessarily think that democracy is weakening, but I do think that those ideas. Does less liberal governance allow more, say, success or economic success or I think a central government strategy? People complain a lot here in the US about the US not having a strategy. I think illiberalism lends itself to having a central strategy. I think one of the other contributing factors is the pandemic, quite frankly. I mean, I think a lot of social liberties were taken away from people for a period of time. And I think it’s driven a lot of maybe thought and or paranoia about growing illiberalism.

    Peter Lewis


    I mean, I’m thinking maybe one example this year is going to be India, obviously, elections coming up in India as well. That seems to be one country where there does seem to be a weakening of sort of democratic institutions despite the fact that this is still the biggest democracy in the world.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah, it is a big democracy. The BJP is very, very popular. And it’ll be very interesting to see what happens in India because we do have a very vocal media in India. We have a very vocal population. And so I think as there are or if there are issues around the elections, I think we’ll hear about them. And I don’t think people will be quiet about it.

    Peter Lewis


    And then, of course, we have some other key elections going on around the world as well. I mean, one of the things that I’m wondering is about young people. I mean, they’re a key voting group in many of these elections, probably in all of these elections that are going on, do you get the feeling that maybe young people are becoming more disengaged? They just don’t feel that democracy is working for them, that elections are making any big difference for them, which is why we’re seeing maybe some of these sort of radical leaders win, populist leaders win in places such as Argentina.

    Tony Nash


    Well, I don’t know. So here in the US, we have the boomers, Gen X, millennials, and then Gen Z. I have three kids that are Gen Z, and I find them, the discussions that they have about politics are pretty informed. I wouldn’t say very informed, but pretty informed. Their friends who talk about politics, they’re pretty informed. Again, they’re getting a lot from social media, but I think they do have the opportunity to dig into issues. And so I think there’s always an observation from older generations that kind of younger people don’t care as much about politics, but the fact is they’re not paying as much in taxes. They may or may not own property. They may or may not have kids attending a school. So they just may not be as interested in particularly some of those local issues. Right. But I wouldn’t necessarily say that we’re seeing, I would say more extreme candidates because of, say, the Gen Z population. I think it’s a balance of, say, here in the US, it’s a balance of baby boomers. And when we look at the disposable income that people can put toward campaigns here in the US, it’s really overwhelmingly the baby boomers who lend to campaigns that then become extreme.

    Tony Nash


    So I don’t know what it looks like in other countries, but I know that the level of disposable income and the giving to campaigns here in the US is largely done by baby boomers.

    Peter Lewis


    And when your kids discuss elections, do they feel that the outcome is likely to make any difference to them personally, to their livelihoods, to their chances of getting a better job or a higher paying job?

    Tony Nash


    I think potentially, yes, I think they do. One of the things here in the US, obviously, we have local elections and then we have state elections, and then we have national elections. The national elections are what gets most of the attention. But the things that have the most, the races that have the most to do with them getting jobs really are the local and state elections. Is a state more appealing economically? Is there a regulation locally? These sorts of things, but they’re paying more attention to the national elections, of course, because that’s what’s in media. But I think they find the local elections pretty boring, quite frankly. And so they are paying attention to the national elections. And I think they do see that as an opportunity for them. Again, they’re not incredibly well informed, but I think they do see the national elections in terms of social policy and economic policy as something that will impact their lives.

    Peter Lewis


    And, of course, we’ve got to mention the US election coming up in November. Do we have any sense of what a potential Trump presidency is going to look like?

    Tony Nash


    That’s a big assumption, Peter. I don’t know. I think there is more of a competition on the republican side than we’re led to believe. I don’t know. It’s probably going to be Trump, but I think it’s possible that there is a different candidate. I don’t know exactly who would be, but I think there’s more of a competition on the republican side than some of the polls today are showing because what we’re seeing are a lot of national polls, and we don’t necessarily vote nationally in the US. We vote at a state level, which awards representatives who vote proportionally to the number of representatives that we have in the. So I think it’ll be more of a contest than we’re led to believe. Now, if Trump is know, I’m not really sure because the last time around, he was not a great administrator. He definitely speaks from the bully pulpit, but he’s not a great administrator. And I think many people who are, say, middle aged or younger in the US look at the current president Biden, and they look at Trump as a potential candidate, and they’re both 80 years old, give or take. And I think the concern from a lot of voters is they want a president who has to live with the consequences of their own policies.

    Tony Nash


    So I think Americans are looking at these older candidates who are at the extreme end of electable and saying, look, these guys, I’m not really sure that they should govern because they’re really too old to live with the consequences of their policies. So that’s why I think we may see more of a contest on the republican side than we’re being led to believe right now.

    Peter Lewis


    Mean, on the Republicans. I mean, there are candidates, aren’t there, who are quite considerably younger than Trump who could present an alternative? I’m thinking of people like Nikki Haley, Ron DeSantis. They’re all sort of candidates who would have to live with the consequences of their decisions.

    Tony Nash


    That’s right. And so until we start seeing some of the primaries come in with Iowa, New Hampshire, and some of these early primaries, I don’t know that we’ll necessarily understand what people on the ground are thinking. And let’s say, for example, Trump doesn’t win Iowa. Well, we’ll hear, well, Iowa is not really important. And then if he doesn’t win New Hampshire, we’ll hear him say that, well, New Hampshire is not really important, these sorts of things. But I do believe that as we start to see some of these early primaries come in, other Americans will get a view of what those early voters are thinking, because these candidates have spent a lot of time on the ground in Iowa, in New Hampshire and other places. And so they’re really reflective or starting to reflect what some of these people on the ground are hearing and seeing.

    Peter Lewis


    And if Trump were to win, I mean, the way he’s talking at the moment, it sounds like his presidency is going to be quite a vindictive one. It’s going to be about taking revenge on all the people he feels have slighted him over the last sort of four years or so.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah, I think it’s really interesting to see the mood in 2016 was very different from what it is now. And the mood in 2016 was that people just wanted to see some sort of change. They felt like their voice wasn’t heard. At least this is on the republican side. Right? They really wanted to see change. I think Trump today is an angrier candidate and a more vindictive candidate than he was in 2016. In 2016, he came across as frustrated but constructive. He now comes across as vindictive and angry. And I don’t know how many people that’s going to appeal to. I know there are a lot of frustrated voters, but I’m not really sure that having that angry of a message can really attract the voters that he needs.

    Peter Lewis


    And he’s also coming across as being fairly illiberal as well. He’s going to tear down some democratic institutions that have been around for a long time and doesn’t seem to respect some of those institutions.

    Tony Nash


    Well, we’ll see. I mean, does he have the power to do see a lot? We’ve seen a lot of, say, directive government from the executive office. We saw it under Obama, we saw it under Trump. We see it under Biden, where these things are then taken to the federal courts and they’re struck down. So can he actually disassemble some of those institutions? I think it would be really hard.

    Peter Lewis


    Well, look, Tony, it’s going to be a fascinating year. Look forward to talking to you more about some of these issues as the year develops. As we said, Taiwan’s elections coming up in just a few days time. So thank you very much for your contribution this morning. Have a happy new year. Look forward to speaking to you.

    Tony Nash


    Thank you, Peter. Happy New Year.

    Peter Lewis


    That’s Tony Nash, who is the founder of Complete Intelligence.

    Categories
    Podcasts

    BBC: How Microfinance Works?

    This podcast is originally published by BBC Business Matters in this link with title “Japan earthquake: What impact will it have on the economy?”: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0h2h5h6.

    BBC’s Description:

    Japan is hit by another earthquake. We hear about the impact it could have on the economy.

    We examine microfinance and how it works in practice after a Bangladeshi pioneer of this type of finance is sentenced for violating labour laws.

    ✅ Create and forecast your own investment portfolios.
    ✅ 94.7% market forecast accuracy.
    ✅ 1,600+ assets forecasted every week.

    Subscribe to CI Markets free. Learn more.

    Transcript

    BBC


    I’ve been speaking to Tony Nash. He’s founder of the AI firm Complete Intelligence and formerly a nonexecutive director with Credit Microfinance bank in Cambodia. I asked him first to explain how microfinance works.

    Tony Nash


    I’ve been working with microfinance in both Sri Lanka and in Cambodia for almost 20 years. And so what we do is we take what’s called concessional safe financial rates from big lenders, whether they’re nonprofits or major international banks, and they lend to the microfinance banks. Most of these microfinance banks are regulated by central banks. So in the past, they were pretty much charities that would lend out at very low rates. They’re now regulated by central banks. So they don’t have a lot of control over a lot of the rates that they lend at. They’re highly, highly regulated by central banks. So what those companies do is they take the, I guess, lower rates. They assume a lot of risk when giving out these small loans, because these are typically people who are, say, pepper farmers, or they’re people who are making small goods or something like that, and collecting the, say, payments on those funds. Actually, in terms of the cost of loan, it’s very high. You have to send somebody out to their house, or you have to maintain that loan.

    BBC


    And Tony, is it actually effective in alleviating poverty, which was Muhammad Yunus’s whole pitch at the beginning. He founded Grameen bank, of course, very involved in putting this together. But has it been effective in bringing people out of poverty?

    Tony Nash


    It is, absolutely. So when Muhammad Yunus started Grameen, the model they were working on was one of collective responsibilities. So he would lend to syndicates of people, say ten or 20 different people who own businesses, and they were accountable for each other to pay back their loans. That can get pretty difficult in some places when someone doesn’t pay back their loan. Over the last 20 years, that model hasn’t been used for probably 15 years at least. You really have individual loans, and those are largely for people who are starting businesses or other things.

    BBC


    And what about the impact on the people who the money is lent to, who sometimes can’t pay back? Because this has been one of the criticisms that you push people already in trouble into worse trouble.

    Tony Nash


    Well, so when I was at the bank, we would watch the debt ratios and the non payment ratios very very closely, and they were typically 1% or less, often less than 1%. So microfinance banks have to watch their ratios every month. They have to report them to the central bank every month. So when we hear about microfinance banks that are acting in a way that isn’t appropriate, where they’re leveraging people too much. They may be in a place where microfinance banks are unregulated, where they’re not regulated by the central bank.

    BBC


    Tony Nash, there.

    Categories
    Audio and Podcasts Podcasts

    FED Remains A Hawk

    This podcast is originally produced and published by BFM 89.9 and can be found at https://www.bfm.my/podcast/morning-run/market-watch/2024-fed-hawk-rate-cuts-oil-red-sea-dollar.

    Subscribe at https://completeintel.com/markets

    The BFM hosts discuss the current status of global markets and the impact of the recent Fed minutes on market sentiment. They interview Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, who provides insights on the potential impact of the Fed’s hawkish tone on asset allocation and equity markets, as well as the implications for the US dollar strength and Asian equity markets. Nash also touches on the volatility in oil prices and the potential impact of geopolitical events on crude shipments.

    Additionally, the show provides updates on Cal-Maine Foods, including a significant drop in net income and a jury’s decision regarding an alleged conspiracy to raise egg prices.

    Transcript:

    BFM

    BFM 89.9, it’s 7:05, it’s Thursday. It’s the fourth of January listening to The Morning Run with Keith Kam and I’m Wong Shou Ning.

    Now in about 30 minutes, we’ll discuss the current status of Jimmy Lai, the founder of Apple Daily, a once upon a time newspaper in Hong Kong’s National Security Trial.

    But in the meantime, let’s recap how global markets closed yesterday. So on Wall Street, it was pretty much a red day. The Dow Jones ended 0.8 % lower. The S&P 500 closed 0.8 % lower as well. The Nasdaq fell 1.2 %. Earlier in the day in Asia, the Nikkei was down 0.2 %. Hongkong’s Hang Seng closed 0.9 % lower. Shanghai’s Composite rose 0.2 %. Singapore’s STI was down 0.9 %. The FBMKLCI managed to gain 0.6 %.

    Okay, so for some insights as to where international markets are heading, we speak to Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. Good morning, Tony. I think it’s still not too late to wish you a happy 2024. Shall we start with the Fed minutes that just came out last night? Oh, well, your time today. I just want to find out what you think about the language they used because they just basically said that it might be appropriate to maintain a restrictive sense for some time. Does this mean that the mantra of hire for longer is still relevant this year?

    Tony Nash

    Yeah, I think it is. So what was interesting about the last Fed press conference is how doveish the President, the chairman came across and the markets read it as the punch bowl is back and as extremely doveish telegraphing from the Fed.

    I think as we see these notes, we realize that the Fed really is serious about hire for longer. There are some banks that expect something like seven rate cuts in the first half of the year, something like that. It just sounds a little bit overly aggressive.

    When we saw the Fed’s last press conference, it seemed like a serious discontinuity from their hire for longer mantra that they had been saying for two years, two, three years. And so it really did force a lot of us to scratch our head and say, Wait, why are they doing that? Is this political? Is there some data that the Fed is seeing that we’re not seeing?

    And I think as we see the minutes today, we realize that neither one is the case. It’s just that Chair Powell came across more doveish than he probably intended.


    BFM

    Okay, so what does this then mean for asset allocation, or at least let’s focus on equities. Is that the reason why the new year has started on such a negative note, especially for the Nasdaq?

    Tony Nash

    Oh, yeah, definitely. I think technology, especially, does well in environments of low interest and loose monetary policy. If we are not going to see a rapid loosening of monetary policy, meaning lower interest rates, more cash in the system, then the valuations that we see in technology are not questionable.

    The other consideration is this, and we’ve talked about this before. If we don’t have accelerating inflation, and this seems a little bit counterintuitive, but if we don’t have accelerating inflation, then the margins that companies can charge start to compress. Companies can’t raise their prices as quickly using inflation as a justification, and competition comes in and we start to see price competition again, which is normal for markets.

    I think there’s going to be a lot of questions around the valuations that companies have, especially if the Fed persists with this higher for longer messaging and we don’t see doveishness in the pipeline.

    BFM

    Tony, how do you reckon this will play into the US dollar strength, which has pretty much been the theme for 2023, going into 2024? Where do you think this will go?

    Tony Nash

    Well, I think it’s status quo for the US dollar. If we’re not seeing aggressive easing, if we’re not seeing accelerated QE or a halting of QT, quantitative tightening, then we can expect the dollar to stay in the environment, all else held equal. We can expect the dollar to stay pretty consistent.

    One of the questions there is around fiscal. How much fiscal spending will the US government do? Which creates a demand for dollars, right? But it is an election year, so I wouldn’t expect fiscal spending to really ease up that much. The real question is, and we look at the CNY and the band that the CNY is trading in, there was some expectation that we’d see more strength in CNY and JPY and other currencies, and we’re just not seeing that today because of what we’ve seen coming out of the Fed.

    BFM

    What does this then mean for Asian equity markets? Because there was the expectations that as the Fed unwinds and becomes more doveish, there would be fun inflow into emerging markets. Is that theory now not going to be disputed?

    Tony Nash

    Yeah, I think it will be disputed because look, if you have a stronger dollar, of course, you have value retention in a stronger dollar. If you have a stronger dollar, you have, on a relative basis, you have weakening, not all, but some weakening Asian currencies. Then if you have those weakening Asian currencies, then the inflows of capital from international markets to those middle income and emerging markets and even, say, Japan, are relatively lower because the currency is a risk for those investors.

    I don’t necessarily think it means that Asian markets are out or are negative, but I do think it means that emerging markets generally will take less of an allocation than some people had thought in 2024. The economic managers in Asia are going to have to be much more careful with their monetary policy to make sure that their currencies don’t erode in the wake of dollar strength. When I say dollar strength, I’m not saying that the dollar is going to rocket up in value, but even if it stays at its current level, it’s a relatively strong currency.

    BFM

    Okay, Tony, where do we then park our money? Because for us in Asia, it’s all in the red on a year to date basis, so is the United States. So where can we put our cash to work, or do we just keep cash for the moment then?

    Tony Nash

    I don’t know that I would necessarily keep cash. I think you have to look at, say, commodity-related stocks, miners, that thing. You have to look at financial services. You have to look at things that are consistent businesses, regardless of, say, the business cycle. And if we start to see margins erode, so some of these things that we saw that were really attractive over the past couple of years, like consumer discretionary and things like dining out in restaurants and these sorts of things where they could pass along inflation to customers, those things are going to be relatively less profitable.

    Assuming we continue with the hire for a longer environment and the allocations that people would make there would necessarily pull back as people look for more consistent, probably value-ish, I wouldn’t necessarily say full value, but value-ish type of stocks. Really, it’s a time to be value-aware and relatively conservative until we have a clear idea of the path.

    BFM

    Tony, we’ve seen some volatility in oil prices due to what’s happening in the Red Sea area. How do you see crude prices trending over the next week or so as energy markets seek clarity in this situation?

    Tony Nash

    Yeah, we saw Brent up, I think, around three and a half % today. It may be, give or take a little bit, but Brent was up quite a bit today to, I think, around 78, 50. But that’s down from, say, $94 in October. So Crude is still relatively weak compared to where it was just a few months ago.

    There is slack in the environment and we are starting to see, say, the job market in the US be weaker. We’re starting to see more, say, layoff announcements, these sorts of things. We’re seeing growth in, say, China expected to continue to slow. Europe really isn’t picking up.

    The question, I think, is on the demand side. If we had tight demand, we could expect to see crude prices spike up pretty quickly, but we’re not necessarily seeing that. The real question is, are we going to have a major geopolitical event that’s going to halt crude shipments? We’re not necessarily seeing that. We’re seeing some putty rockets in the Red Sea, but we’re not necessarily seeing major disruptions yet.

    And if that becomes a major disruption, then yeah, we could expect some serious rises, especially in Brent, but we’re not necessarily there yet. There’s some volatility, there’s some up and down. I would expect to see some action taken against the Hootie positions ongoing for the next several weeks to take them out and reduce that risk.

    BFM

    All right. Thank you very much for your time. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, reminding us that the Fed remains still quite hawkish, their tone. And as a result, it looks like the reign of the King dollar continues, at least for a while. Status core, he says. But there are things that we could continue watching for perhaps… I mean, everything seems to be hinged on China’s long-awaited recovery since 2022, and I don’t know if that’s going to happen in 2024, but let’s wait. And see, I guess.

    China, the comeback hit that didn’t materialize. Maybe 2024 is their year. But let’s turn our attention to Cal-Maine Foods. Now you’re wondering, what does this company do? It is actually the United States largest shell-egg production company. They reported a net income of $17 million for the second quarter of fiscal 2024. Now what was significant was the 92 % drop compared with $198 million in the same quarter last year. Was there foul play there? I don’t know. But CalMaine did say that one of its facilities in Kansas tested positive for Avient flu production at that facility was temporarily halted. The company is working around with other facilities to minimize disruptions.

    Meanwhile, a jury has also found that Cal-Maine and other companies were liable for an alleged conspiracy to raise prices of egg products from 1998 to 2008. They have their own egg cartel there. That’s not an extraordinary type news. Sounds familiar, right? Oh, my goodness, Keith. You’re really rolling with all the puns this morning. Anyway, the jury did award plaintiffs around $18 million in damages. So that’s some context for you there.

    Okay, so Cal-Maine, not much coverage on Wall Street. There are only three analysts that cover this job. And guess what? They’re evenly split because there’s just one buy, one hold, one sell. Consensus target price for the stock, $55. It was actually down $1.82 during regular market hours, trading to $54.86. The stock is actually down more than four % for what is the United States. Just two days of trading at this moment, right? Not very exciting. Oh, my goodness, there goes another pun. Up next, we’ll cover the top stories in the newspapers and portals. Stay tuned for that BFM 89.9.

    Categories
    Week Ahead

    2024 growth-disinflation-central banks-dollar; Crude quality; and Yemen-Red Sea shipping risk

    Year-End Sale is here! Get 80% off CI Markets subscription at $99 per year. Promo ends Dec. 31st.

    This 2023 year-end special of The Week Ahead has a lineup of great guests, discussing topics to prepare you for the upcoming 2024.

    1. Brent Johnson on 2024 Growth, Disinflation, Central Banks, and the Dollar:
    We tackle the Fed’s stance; frankly, it’s a bit perplexing. With various opinions floating around, from 275bp cuts to just 2, the big question is, why the urgency if everything seems fine? Brent helps us get clarity on that.

    We’re hovering around 5.5%, and markets are soaring, but what’s the rush? Brent sheds light on why 2024 might be “priced for perfection” and explores potential downside risks, from Fed miscalculations to unexpected Dollar strength.

    2. Tracy Shuchart on Crude Quality:
    Turning our attention to shale, Tracy dismisses the Texas export buzz but gets into a more interesting topic – crude quality. Tracy and Ralph discuss on Twitter the nuances of shale and the importance of understanding crude quality, especially with recent stories about Texas exports for tax reasons. What are the secrets of gassy wells and their impact on the market?

    3. Albert Marko on Yemen-Red Sea Shipping Risks:
    With rockets fired by Houthis, a coalition is formed to protect vessels, leading some shipping companies to bypass the Red Sea and opt for the longer route around Africa. Albert gives us the lowdown on how long this situation might persist, its reasons, and the potential impacts on shipping.

    Join us for these insightful discussions and gain a clearer perspective on the year ahead.

    Transcript

    Tony Nash

    Our year-end sale is here. Get 80% off of CI Markets Premium Subscription for only $99 for the whole year. Get AI-powered forecast of over 1,600 assets across stocks, ETFs, forex, commodities, and economics. With 94.7% forecast accuracy, this tool helps traders and investors like you make smarter decisions and plan portfolios better. This promo ends December 31st. Go to completeintel.com/yearend to learn more. That’s 80% off CI Markets at $99 per year.

    Tony Nash


    Hi, everyone, welcome to the week ahead. I’m Tony Nash. Today, we’re joined by Brent Johnson, Tracy Shuchart, and Albert Marko. As we head into the end of the year, we’ve got a few things we’re going to talk about today. In 2024, obviously, we’re looking at growth, disinflation, central banks, dollar. We’ll talk with Brent about that. With Tracy, we want to talk a little bit about fracking and crude quality and the surge of exports we’ve had out of the US and Texas lately. Then with Albert, we’ll talk to you politics, and we’re looking at the Yemen, Red Sea shipping risk and what’s really happening there and how long it will last. Guys, thank you very much. I know we’re headed into a holiday weekend, so I appreciate you taking the time.

    Tony Nash


    Brent, and again, thanks for joining us again. I want to start with the Fed because we had this meeting last week where everything’s doveish now. I honestly don’t know what to think about the Fed. Are we higher for longer or not? I saw one bank, it’s a European bank, so that helps you to understand, but saying that we’ll have 275 basis points of cuts in the first half of the year. It seems ridiculous, but I think nobody really knows if we’re going to have five cuts in ’24 or two cuts or no cuts or whatever. Bostec was out earlier this week saying that we’ll have two cuts, but we have other Fed presidents saying other things. I think we’re in this mode where I don’t even think the Fed guys are aligned on what they do. I guess what I’m confused by is why is there so much hope for cuts when we’re told that growth is fine? We’re told that inflation is fine. We’re told that retail sales are fine. PCE in Q3 was just adjusted to 2%, so PCE is fine. We’re at a 5.5% Fed rate and markets are flying. Why the urgency now?

    Tony Nash


    I put this tweet up on the screen. Some of the deep sale capital, I don’t know who that is, but they basically boiled this question down and I wanted to prep you for this. So why the urgency now, Brent?

    Brent Johnson


    Well, it’s a very good question, and to be honest, I’m really not sure myself. It was a very fast change of tone from Powell. On late November, early December, he was hired for longer and two weeks later, he says we’re considering cutting rates, basically, and didn’t push back when people challenged him on it. There’s clearly something going on. I’m not quite sure what it is. I have a couple of theories. I think the most prominent theory right now is that it’s political, right? They don’t want to have a recession going into a presidential election. And if we had a big recession right in front of it, that could be bad for Biden, and that could be as a political move or vice versa. There’s other people on the other side are saying if he goosees the economy going into the election, that’s political, too. But I think that could be part of it. I think the other part of it is that potentially they have access to information or they see some things coming that the rest of the market doesn’t. And if they are going to be cutting after so recently saying that’s hire for longer, they must see some bad things on the horizon that nobody else sees or the rest of us don’t see.

    Brent Johnson


    And one thing I would say is I think the market has reacted correctly directionally to the news, but I think the magnitude of the moves have gotten way ahead of themselves. So equities rallying on a doveish pivot from the Fed makes total sense. And this goes all the way back to the previous Fed meeting because they were somewhat dove-ish in that meeting as well. And markets have gone straight up for six weeks. Yesterday was the first significant down day in a really long time. And so to me, everything is priced to perfection right now, and we just live in a very imperfect world. So I agree with the direction. I disagree with the magnitude. And for me, it’s easy to decide what to do right now, and that’s to do nothing and to, if anything, hedge the downside. Because to me, everything’s priced in to the upside already. The other thing I would say is that some of the criticism of the Fed is warranted, but some of it is not. And the thing is, regardless of what the Fed does, they’re going to get criticized. There’s a whole industry that has been created and designed to criticize the Fed regardless of what they say.

    Brent Johnson


    Let’s say they do see some slowdown in the economy coming. At the end of the day, the Fed wants to slow the economy. That was the whole point of the rate hikes to begin with. That is the way they thought that they could tame inflation. But while they want to slow the economy, they don’t want to crash the economy. They don’t want to have a global financial crisis that they cannot control. And so if you take that into effect and you consider how far they went in such a short period of time from 0-5.5 %, and now let’s say that they see some success, they think the economy is going to start to slow, but they don’t want to crash the economy, then it does actually make sense to start before you get to the 2%. He even said that in his press conference, If we don’t start cutting before we get to 2%, then we risk going past 2% and getting into severe deflation, which they don’t want severe deflation. If you think about it like landing a plane, you don’t want to land the plane going full speed. You do want to come in on a smooth path.

    Brent Johnson


    And so maybe there’s some of that going on as well. And the final thing I’d say just on this is that the people at the Fed are not stupid. Now, they may be misguided, they may be out of touch, they may be arrogant, but they’re not stupid people. And so if they are now signaling that no more hikes and probably cuts, there’s probably a reason for that. And I think people should take that into account when they’re buying the all time highs and all these assets. Oh, yeah.

    Tony Nash


    Go ahead, Tracy.

    Tracy Shuchart


    I have a question, Brent. Do you see a scenario which we’re going into an election year? Obviously, there’s a lot of political things going on. Nobody wants the recession heading into this next election. But do you see a scenario in which we have Fed cutting, you have Yellen still issuing bonds, and obviously fiscal spending is not going to stop. So do you see a situation where this could reignite inflation?

    Brent Johnson


    Yeah, potentially. It all depends on why they are now moving to cuts, right? If they are moving to cuts because they are trying to combat this deflation that they see on the horizon, then it just depends. If the deflationary forces outweigh the cuts that they’re doing, then you could still get deflation. But if those deflationary forces don’t show up and they start easing again, it definitely risks the possibility of a further acceleration of inflation. I think that’s the last thing that Powell wants, which is why I feel like there must be some reason that he’s risking inflation reaccelerating. I wish I knew what it was. I don’t. But it’s a very good question. And that’s what’s got me thinking the most is because nobody thought he would go to five and a half % in 12 months, but he did it. And nobody thought that he could do it without crashing the markets, but he did it. I think the reason that he did that is he didn’t want to be another Arthur Burns. I think his legacy is extremely important. He’s already got all the money in the world. He doesn’t need any more money.

    Brent Johnson


    The only thing he has to protect at this point is his reputation. I think that’s a big thing for him. For him to risk inflation reaccelerating, I think he must see something that perhaps the rest of the market doesn’t see.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah. Before Albert jumps in here, I want to say a couple of things. First, I agree with you that although I mock the Fed on occasion, I actually think they’ve done a really good job of getting us into this zone of acceptability. It’s taken longer than a lot of people wanted to, but the magnitude of their actions was actually really fast. I think they could have hugely miscalculated, and I actually don’t think they did terribly. Because these are broad policy decisions they’re making. You don’t really know where it’s going to hit. They actually, I think, did a really good job, despite a lot of their personal defects or whatever. Like you said, they are smart, and they did a pretty good job of landing us where we are. I do think, though, I hear you say the election year, but it is pretty normal to hike in an election year. If we look historically, it’s not a completely abnormal thing. Of course, we didn’t see that in 2020 because we had COVID, right? But it’s not abnormal to hike or for the Fed to adjust monetary policy in an election year. Is that right?

    Brent Johnson


    I don’t think it’s abnormal. I don’t think… No, I think you’re correct. I don’t think it’s abnormal. I just think we live in abnormal times where everything is managed now. From the last, let’s just call it 1980 to 2020, we lived in a world that was globalizing and getting closer and working closer together. For the last four years, we’re now in a world that is fracturing and supply chains are not getting more efficient, they’re becoming less efficient. And we’ve got geopolitical issues that we didn’t have the whole time back then. I just feel like… And as a result and the fact that the debts have gotten so big everywhere. And this is what I don’t think a lot of people realize. There’s a lot of people out there who think that inflation is here to stay and 2020 was a game changer and the government’s response ensures that we’re always going to have inflation. Listen, I can’t say that that’s not true. Maybe we will have inflation going forward. But with the type of system that we have in a debt-based monetary system, you always risk deflationary shocks. Because if the economy is not moving and money is not circulating, you will get defaults.

    Brent Johnson


    And when defaults happen, there’s always the risk that it becomes contagious and it jumps from one place to the other.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah.

    Tony Nash


    I want to talk about deflationary shock in a second. Albert, what have you got?

    Albert Marko


    I mean, I agree with Brent. 80, 90% of what he says is pretty much correct, but going… I’m one of those guys that I like to look at who’s in charge and what have they done in the past. For me, Yellen has been doing the exact same playbook as she did in 2017, where she took the VIX to 9.7%. She had 12 weeks. I looked at the chart, there was 12 weeks of up markets at that time. It was crazy.

    Albert Marko


    Trump at that point with Minuchin, ousted her. They just got rid of her. They didn’t reappoint her for the position, so she was done at that point. But the biggest thing that we should learn this year is the Fed wants inflation. The reserve currency guys don’t do debt jubilee, so they’re using inflation to do whatever soft landing plans that they have in the mix to cut corners off your currency. They had multiple chances to cut inflation all of last year, in which they’ve emphatically passed each time. Now we can debate whether it’s economic problems on the horizon or political strategy by certain members of the Fed and the treasury, that’s something else. But for me, US stocks love 1% GDP growth, which by definition means 65% of the rest of America is already in a recession. I mean, nobody wants to discuss those things. But going into an election year, we’re definitely going to hear more about it. I just don’t see inflation easing up. I’ve talked to quite a few people that are connected up into the Fed, and they’re looking at inflation and starting to worry once again. Cutting rates is a very dangerous game with inflation still problem, in my opinion.

    Tony Nash


    Okay.

    Brent Johnson


    Can I just follow up really quickly? The other thing, again, I think the markets have reacted correctly directionally, but just the magnitude is way too big because you got to remember these dot plans. It’s just what each person thinks at that time. They can change their mind. It’s not a unanimous thing. They don’t all agree on the dots. Again, it is true that if you don’t want to crash into 2% and you want to glide into 2%, then you probably want to start cutting as you get closer to it. But if we don’t see continued movement towards 2% inflation, we’re not going to get all these cuts. In other words, all these cuts are not guaranteed. That’s where I think the market has just gotten way ahead of themselves. I think that while they haven’t necessarily misinterpreted the Fed, I think they have misinterpreted the Fed’s intention to not let inflation just totally run away again. Now, again, it doesn’t mean that that won’t happen. It doesn’t mean it won’t get away from them. But I don’t think that they have just all just pivoted and said, We’re cutting rates no matter what, inflation be damned and we’ll just deal with the consequences later.

    Brent Johnson


    I think they’re trying to get this off landing is what they’re trying to do.

    Albert Marko


    Without question, they’ve said that over and over and over again for two years. There’s no question they’re trying to do that. I think the magnitude of this mood, this is a question for you, Brent, is that you think a lot of it is to do with just the liquidity of the market in this time. Right now is the holidays, nobody’s really there, things can move quickly.

    Brent Johnson


    I think it’s that, but it’s also, again, directionally, I think it makes sense, but the dollar has sold off a lot. And as the dollar sells off, that provides liquidity to the whole world. And that’s why you’ve seen financial conditions ease so much. And part of it is also that everybody’s just front running the Fed. They’re not front running the ECP. They’re not front running the other central banks. And the idea that the Europe, which is already basically in a recession, is going to outhawk the Fed over the next year to me just doesn’t make a lot of sense. And so if we get a bunch of cuts, then what the dollar has done and what the equities has done makes sense. But again, these are all priced in, but they’re not guaranteed. And we could very well be in a situation where Europe is cutting aggressively in order to fight their recession, in which case the dollar probably rises versus the euro. Again, I think 2024 is going to be much more challenging than 2023. And in fact, I think could look a lot like 2022. I think we could have a lot of volatility in the first half of the year.

    Brent Johnson


    And then as we go in towards the second half of the year and the election, things perhaps calm down a little bit. But I think the first six months are going to be very volatile.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah. One of the things that whenever we talk about the Fed and what the rate intentions are is Powell and the Fed have said they want to normalize rates. We had ZERP and NERP and all this other stuff. Five and a half %, to be honest, historically, is not a high rate. If we’re normalizing rates, if we see cuts coming, what is that normal rate? Is it two and a half? We don’t really know the answer to this, but we don’t have, let’s say, the demographic issues that Japan has where they have to have NERC to make up for productivity. We don’t have the demographic issues that Europe has where they have to have low interest rates to make up for a lack of productivity. Similar argument could be said for Korea, China, at least in the next year or so. Five and a half %. I hear people act like these interest rates are extremely high, but really from a historical perspective, are they?

    Brent Johnson


    They’re not high from a historical perspective, but what’s different from previous times in history, where they were at this level, is the level of debt and the level of debt that was taken on at very low rates. What I mean by that is there’s a lot of debt that let’s just say, that was issued sometime in the last 10 years, 5-10 years. It was issued when rates were zero to one and a half %. Now that they’re getting reset with interest rates at five and a half %, perhaps their car payment is going, I’m just making something up. Or their mortgage goes up from a $500 payment to an $1,800 payment or whatever it is. The speed with which rates went up and the speed and the magnitude of the difference of where the debt was initially taken on and where it’s being rolled, I think, is much different than in previous points in history where interest rates are at these same levels.

    Tony Nash


    Right. Okay, that’s fair. Before we get. Into the next-

    Brent Johnson


    I’m going to jump up and turn these shades down because the sun is still coming right in my eyes.

    Tony Nash


    Okay.

    Albert Marko


    That’s something that I don’t see in Nebraska very often.

    Tony Nash


    That’s right.

    Brent Johnson


    That’s right.

    Tony Nash


    Brent, while you’re doing that, I want to ask a question about Japan. Okay. We’ve had all sorts of discussion about the Bank of Japan and them potentially tightening, taking on different tightening activities. But why would the BOJ tighten if we have a Fed that’s loosening? Because that effectively makes them uncompetitive in terms of exports. We’d see the Yen jump dramatically in value. From an export perspective, their competitors are Taiwan, Korea, and China. Those guys are not putting on tighter. They’re not tightening at all. So it doesn’t make sense to me that Japan would start tightening right now. Does that make sense to you? I hear the chatter every day, but I can’t quite put it together why they would start doing that.

    Brent Johnson


    Well, I think part of the reason that they were doing it was the currency fell 30 % in two years, which that’s an absolutely enormous move for a major currency. It’s not totally unheard of for an emerging market currency, but for the let’s call it the second or third biggest currency in the world, that’s a massive move. And then for the first time in literally decades, they were starting to get inflationary pressures in Japan. And so I think there was some pressure. The currency just kept falling, starting to get inflationary pressures. I think there was some political pressure internally to get off of zero and get somewhat… I mean, again, if you even go to half a %, that’s nowhere near normalization, but that’s a big move for Japan. I think that is part of it. But I agree with you, Tony, is that they can’t really strengthen their currency a lot. If they raise rates too much, their entire banking system comes under pressure because their banks, their pension funds, their endowments, all these different local insurance companies, they own trillions of dollars of zero and negative yielding GBs. They would face the same thing.

    Brent Johnson


    They would potentially face the same thing in Japan that the US banks faced last March. Rates go up, the bonds fall. If the banks then have to start liquidating those bonds, those JJBs that are now completely underwater, they could have… They can not out-hawk. They can out-hawk the Fed or some other on a short term relative basis, but they are not going to get to a point where their interest rates are higher than these other central banks because it would just decimate their economy.

    Tony Nash


    We’d have BTFP to the 10th power or something like that.

    Brent Johnson


    Right, exactly.

    Tony Nash


    Okay, so I want to take a look and all of you guys jump in here. But Brent, you say that 2024 is priced to perfection. What do you see as the biggest potential downside risks, and I’ll name a few, but let me just name a few things. Fed miscalculation, unexpectedly strong dollar, which you mentioned in a tweet, I don’t know, last week or something, US commercial real estate, US election related volatility. By that I mean fiscal overspending, political overreaction, that thing. Bank of Japan changing really anything. China real estate, CCP miscalculation, German de-industrialization, Middle East geopolitical risk, oil prices. There’s a lot out there.

    Brent Johnson


    That can- All that stuff. All of that stuff. And that’s the thing is I don’t know what it’s going to be. I just know that there’s all these potential things that you just rattled off. I mean, there’s a couple of dozen right there, and yet the markets are priced as if everything’s beautiful and there’s no potential problems on the horizon. Markets do, they climb a wall of worry. I’m not saying we’re going to have a collapse next year. I’m just saying that everything is priced as if all these cuts are for sure, as if Europe is not going to start cutting rates, as if there’s not going to be any problems in China or Japan, and as if geopolitics is all going to just take a rest and have no more blowups. And I just don’t think that’s the world we live in anymore. And I think it’s more likely than not that we’re going to have some an outbreak of volatility. Now, whether that takes place in the Middle East, which I think Albert is going to talk about, whether it takes place in Japan because they’re messing around their interest rates, whether it happens in the US due to commercial real estate, I’m not smart enough to know that.

    Brent Johnson


    What I do know is assets are all the way back to where they were two years ago. They’re back at their highs. Volatility is almost as low as it’s been, not quite as low as what Albert was talking about with the Ellen five or six years ago, but very low historically. History has taught me when everybody is doing the same thing, that’s about the time that they’re going to get hit upside the head. To me, it just makes sense to be prudent right now. Again, this is not advice, but just as an example. Right now, basically, every asset class is within 10% of where it was January first, 2022. And the VIX is very low. Now we’ve got interest rates at five and a half %. We’ve got geopolitical problems, all these things that you mentioned. You can buy a put on the S&P 500 that is 1% out of the money through June. Six months duration, 1% out of the money, and it will cost you 2% of your portfolio. Let’s pretend that I’m wrong. There’s no volatility in the first half of the year and markets rip another 15, 16%. Okay, so now you’re up 13 while everybody else is up 15 or 16.

    Brent Johnson


    That’s not horrible, right? You still made money. But if we do get some volatility and we don’t have this perfect market that everybody seems to think we’re going to get, and we have a repeat of the first half of 2022 and 2024, and equities are down 10%, 15%, 20%. Now you’re down one or two. I mean, to me, that’s a pretty good risk reward. With assets the way they are right now, I’m much more inclined to buy protection than to put on leverage.

    Tony Nash


    Great. Tracy, of those things that I mentioned, what are you… Or other things, what are you looking at as risks for ’24?

    Tracy Shuchart


    I think commercial real estate is definitely a risk. How that pans out in the market and does that cause a contagion in other areas? I think everybody sees that right now. That’s been an ongoing saga. But how that plays out will be very interesting. Will the treasury or the Fed have to get involved again? As they did in March with SPV Bank failing, are they going to let the commercial real estate market fail entirely? Or these banks that are backing the loans, I should say. I think that’s definitely something to watch out for, but I think that’s a freight train everybody’s already watching, to be honest. I do think that if the government or the Federal Reserve has to get involved on the banking side of the issue, they definitely will. But again, does that cause a contagion in other markets? We’ll have to see.

    Tony Nash


    I just saw a story. I mean, this is pretty common everyday. Some building in L. A, the value is like 50 % of the loan value. And so this is common, right?And so-

    Brent Johnson


    Well, Tony, I’ll give you a good real world. I’m back in San Francisco now for the holidays, and this is a hilarious story. The office that I used to work in when I lived here was in the old Federal Reserve Building in downtown San Francisco. Right. And it was privatized years ago. And in January of 2020, when I was still working there, the landlord of the building or the owner of the building sold literally January of 2020. Think about the timing on that, right? Perfect. And so he timed that perfectly. And now the owner, a couple of months ago, turned the keys back into the bank, just not making any money, can’t meet the mortgage, gave the keys back to the bank. I was going to go into the office, but I didn’t because the bank is now running the building and the heater blew up and they haven’t fixed the heater. So there’s no heat in the bulding.

    Tony Nash


    It’s always HVAC and stuff like that that these guys skimp on.

    Brent Johnson


    Yeah. That’s just one example. Now, does that mean that’s happening to every building? No, but I’m sure it’s not the only one either. My colleagues have already said that when their lease is up, I don’t know if it’s this year or next year, they’re not planning to renew it because they’re mainly working from home anyway or they’re working remotely, and the bank is not doing a great job of managing the building while they have it. Anyway, I just wanted to give that little anecdote.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah. No, this is what we’re seeing. A lot of this has happened because of work from home and people just aren’t filling these buildings to capacity or close to capacity like they had. Albert, what are you looking at for risks in ’24? You’ve been talking particularly about banks, US banks for a month or two. What are you worried about within US banks and what else are you worried about?

    Albert Marko


    A little bit of what Tracy was talking about the commercial real estate and the loans and whatnot. I think from what I hear, Bank of America is in pretty deep trouble. Whether they’re in Solomon or not is quite a question that probably we’re going to have to look at in 2024. Now, do I think they’ll fail? No, because Powell likes to bail everybody out. But any rumors or murmurs of Bank of America, insolvent would definitely cause the market to take notice.

    Tony Nash


    Right. Between big banks like B of A, between the regional banks, between commercial real estate, these are probably the things that you guys are looking at.

    Albert Marko


    Yeah. As layoffs kick in, loans start defaulting, debt starts going higher, credit card debt goes up. I mean, it’s just it’s snowballs at that point.

    Tony Nash


    Well, the other thing is we don’t have the perpetual noise every day of inflation is rising. Companies can’t go out and put a 5% price rise or 10% price rise or whatever like they were doing in ’21 and ’22 and even early ’23. I think I was looking at General Mills. There was something, so announcement from General Mills yesterday, and they were saying, Hey, we can’t change the price by volume anymore because consumers won’t take it.

    Albert Marko


    They had those tailwinds of inflation that helped earnings, but that’s certainly gone. Earnings in the first two quarters of 2024 are going to probably be really bad.

    Tony Nash


    Right. This brings me to a tweet that Brent that you sent out earlier. You said, One thing to remember is you don’t need a flood of new sellers or buyers for the stock prices to begin to fall or rise. You just need an absence of new buyers or sellers to show up. Whether that’s products for General Mills or whether that’s equities, if buyers don’t show up because of these risks or because we’re not getting this perpetual noise that we need to be afraid of inflation, we could see things change pretty quickly, right?

    Brent Johnson


    Yeah. Again, this is why when markets get to an extreme, whether an extreme high or an extreme low, that’s why they typically reverse, right? Markets don’t move in a straight line. I actually believe that we’re going to see equity, much higher equity prices in the years ahead, but I don’t think that we’re going straight higher from here because markets pendulum swing, and it’s when you get to clear to one side, that’s what provides the energy to then swing it back the other way. At the end of October, we do a weekly show with my friend John, and we were talking about how sentiment had gotten pretty low. It wasn’t totally low, but it was close. It wasn’t extreme, but it was getting pretty close to extreme negative. We said it wouldn’t surprise us if the market bounced a few weeks coming out of the Fed meeting because markets don’t go in a straight line. Now, since then, and so we got the two weeks, which I was expecting I was not expecting the subsequent three or four weeks that we have now got. But now markets are up until yesterday. Everything switched yesterday and we’ll see what happens over the next week.

    Brent Johnson


    But markets had gotten more extreme to the upside than they were to the downside as far as sentiment and relative strength and all these different ways to measure where you’re at on the positive or negative had gotten even more positive than they were negative back in October. And so the speed with which things move now, that’s something else that’s a little different. Over the last four years, the speed with which we swing from positives and negatives, I think, has increased dramatically from where we were 20 years ago. Yeah. Everything moves in unison. It used to be that you’d have a sell-off and maybe you’d stay down for two or three months, and then it might take six months to build all that back up. But now you get huge 10 % swings. It’s not that common to have 10 % months in equities. It happens at either. But typically, though, it typically happens in big bear markets because you’re rallying from oversold levels. I just feel like that the swings that we’ve had over the last four years, if you go back and look at the charts, they’re just like big Vs and Ws. There’s not a lot of use in there.

    Brent Johnson


    There’s not a lot of ends and use. I think that’s the world we live in because, again, we’ve gotten to the super debt cycle where the debts are so big that if the central banks and the monetary authorities and the governments don’t react quickly, you’re going to get some very, very bad things happen. I don’t know if that helps move the conversation at all, but I just think that that’s, again, where we’re different now than we were maybe 20 years ago.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah, absolutely.

    Albert Marko


    We’re seeing that in everything, even like oil. I’ve been watching oil a lot lately.

    Brent Johnson


    Yeah, perfect example. Perfect example.

    Albert Marko


    I’m like. How are we having 5% moves on day-to-day basis? This is crazy.

    Tony Nash


    Right. Albert, that is a perfect segue to move to Tracy. Tracy, let’s talk about crude quality and shale. I saw some stories earlier this week about how Texas is exporting a bunch of shale this month for tax reasons or whatever. You said it’s boring, which is fine, but it’s interesting to see those levels. I’m curious about shale and the quality of crude that we can get or that we’re getting from shale. On the screen, we’ve got an exchange between you and Ralph, who comes on the show pretty regularly on crude quality and gassy wells and this thing. Can you talk to us about that and why it’s happening and why it’s important?

    Tracy Shuchart


    Yeah, absolutely. When we’re talking about US shale right now, and we’re seeing all these rig declines, but we’re seeing US shale volumes increase because of better technology and whatnot. I won’t go into the minutiae of how they’re drilling these wells. But what happens is when you do that, yeah, you’re producing more, but what is happening is that what you are getting out of these wells is gas here and gas here. What I mean by that is that you’re producing more natural gas liquids, which is technically not oil. Those are things like natural gas, propane, and other things that you can use for chemicals, but you can’t use that as an oil substitute. Over time, what is happening, because we’re trying to stretch these wells out, these well productivity out, is that what we’re getting out of these wells just happens to be lighter and lighter and can’t be used for necessarily the same things that oil could be used for. In other words, you can’t use it to refine gasoline out of, but you can use it at a chemical company to refine chemicals out of. It’s a different makeup of what these wells are producing.

    Tracy Shuchart


    As they try to stretch this, we’re getting more and more of this type of product.

    Tony Nash


    Okay, so why does that matter? How much of what comes out of a well is used for gasoline versus other chemical products?

    Tracy Shuchart


    I mean, that’s a very loading question because it depends on, is it oil sands? Is it US Shell? Is it deep water? That’s totally going to matter because they’re totally different crew quality. But what that matters is that when we’re looking at these numbers, Shell is a 13 million barrels a day plus right now. Everybody’s like, Oh, Shell is back. They’re producing more than ever. But again, it’s not actual product that you can use for traditional oil-producing products and other. I mean, it’s great for the chemical industry because that means they can buy more and it’s cheap. It’s great for that industry.

    Tony Nash


    I just want to go back. You said if we see that, say, Texas is producing 13 million barrels a day, those barrels are not necessarily… It’s not necessarily oil.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Correct. They count NGLs, which are natural gas liquids, into the entire food production. This is what some people had a problem with EIA and how they were reporting it. They made a little bit of change that just came into effect this last month that basically they segue out the difference between what is actually an NGL and what is traditional oil, so to speak, within the weekly reports now. You can see that number even just over the last month has grown.

    Tony Nash


    Okay. What does that mean for these upstream companies in terms of profitability? If there’s more crude in those barrels, do they make more money?

    Tracy Shuchart


    Well, I think-

    Tony Nash


    Sorry to be so basic.

    Tracy Shuchart


    I just want to know. No, I think how you have to look at this is that… Really, I think it comes down to mergers and acquisitions right now, to be honest with you. If we look at this, we have a ton of big deals that went on this year. I think if you look at the Dallas Fed survey just released yesterday, 77% of all of those producers surveyed said, Yeah, we’re going to expect to see more M&A. You can see this. If you look at what’s the survey of how much do you want to produce, you see all these smaller companies are planning to produce as much as they can. All the majors don’t want to produce anything and are just looking for acquisitions. I think that’s really the dynamic we’re seeing right now is we’re having all these smaller to mid companies trying to produce the heck out of these wells, so they look productful so that they get bought out by the majors. I think that’s what’s happening in the industry as far as production is concerned. I think it all boils down to business right now.

    Tony Nash


    Okay. Why are they pushing to be acquired? Are they largely debt-funded as companies?

    Tracy Shuchart


    Not necessarily, but the deals that are going down right now are huge and way more than you’re making if you’re a small company that’s basically just producing NGLs at this point. If you make your wells look more productive, you get these billion-dollar deals going on. That’s very attractive to you.

    Tony Nash


    Okay.

    Tony Nash


    But there’s no bond- Go ahead.

    Brent Johnson


    The majors are buying them.

    Tony Nash


    Go ahead, Brent.

    Brent Johnson


    Sorry to interrupt. But the majors are buying them. They’re basically buying new revenue, right? Correct. Because they’re not growing themselves, so that’s why they’re okay.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Exactly.

    Brent Johnson


    Yeah.

    Tony Nash


    Great. Okay, that’s good. Thank you for that. I think it’s a lot more complicated than I’m used to seeing. I’m not an energy expert like you are. Sorry for the dumb questions, but I just need to make sure that this is happening.

    Tracy Shuchart


    No dumb questions.

    Brent Johnson


    Can I ask you a question? Can I ask you a question related to that? Is there a… I’m sure there is somewhere… Are you familiar with estimates of how long these shale companies can pump at this magnitude? Is it two years? Is it three years? Is it seven years?

    Tracy Shuchart


    I mean, those estimates used to be a lot shorter, but with new technology, they’re pushing that. It’s like energy, what is it? Gasoline efficiency. We’re just pushing out the miles. But you have to realize most of the tier one acreage is gone. We don’t have… We don’t have a new auction after yesterday until after 2025 because that’s gone. So as far as federal lands are concerned, and so basically, they’re pushing… It’s the pedal to the metal right now. It’s like, let’s get out everything when we can. How long that can last? I can’t tell you for sure, but I can say that it’s not forever.

    Brent Johnson


    In general, it’s lasted longer than a lot of people expect it. Is that right?

    Tracy Shuchart


    Absolutely.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Yeah, absolutely. That’s because of a lot of the new technologies that have come within the industry as well. You have to factor that technology in when you’re looking at these wells. Five years ago, we probably wouldn’t have been where we are today had it not been for… Probably would have already seen a decline in other words.

    Tony Nash


    Tracy, in the state of Texas, where I live, there really isn’t much federal land. It’s almost all private. There’s a small amount of federal land. When you talk about the federal auctions, how much does that impact a place like Texas where there’s a lot of fracking?

    Tracy Shuchart


    Well, it doesn’t necessarily. Most of your federal auctions are going to be in New Mexico, Wyoming.

    Tony Nash


    Colorado.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Colorado, Gulf of Mexico, offshore. That’s where most of your federal lands are coming from.

    Tony Nash


    Okay, very good. Okay, thanks for that. It was hugely informative. Thank you so much for that. Let’s move on to geopolitics. Albert. Okay, everyone’s a –

    Albert Marko


    Boring.

    Tony Nash


    Sorry.

    Albert Marko


    Boring, boring geopolitics.

    Tony Nash


    No, not at all.

    Brent Johnson


    Nothing going on there at all.

    Tony Nash


    There’s nothing going on here.

    Tony Nash


    Everyone’s a Red Sea expert this week, of course. Houthis fired rockets and vessels. You guys know the story. Now the US has a coalition that will protect ships in the area, supposedly. Several shipping companies, particularly Europeans, have opted to go around the Horn of Africa instead of transiting through the Red Sea to go through the Suez Canal. What’s going on here? I’ve heard some ideas that this coalition of European vessel owners is really trying to strong-arm DOD to do some things they don’t want to do, that thing. What’s really happening there and what are the impacts?

    Albert Marko


    Well, I mean, the Houthis, because of the Israeli-Gaza conflict, decided to enter the fray and show the world that they’re an actual force. I mean, realistically, they’re not. They couldn’t really hit Israel as much as they are yapping like dogs that they were going to destroy parts of Israel. So they started taking aim at ships that were destined for Israel. But they don’t really know which ships are going where. You’d have to be an expert with the-.

    Tony Nash


    Or just aim at Zim.

    Albert Marko


    Yeah, exactly. It’s just… It’s one of those things where the Iranians wanted to influence the area, and they used the Houthis as a proxy. I mean, it’s an age-old problem, going back 50, 60 years, where Yemen has been a launch pad for communist insurgencies within Saudi Arabia. So this is nothing new, right? The problem is these ships have insurance requirements, right? And once you enter a conflict zone, those insurance coverages evaporate. So for the ship owners, one, it’s not very safe to try to go through there and God forbid, a ship gets sunk and then you lose everything. And your insurance doesn’t cover it, you’re completely out of business at that point. Realistically, the cost of the Suez Canal passage versus the diesel that they’re using is pretty much even. It’s just a time factor at that point. There’s issues if you’re carrying oil to Rotterdam from the Middle East that the price can sway significantly in that time frame. Those issues are to be assessed by the ship owners. Now, I have a fear that the US might get a little bit brave and start attacking some of the Houthis positions with drones or missile strikes or so on and so forth, which would probably affect the price of oil going into the market.

    Albert Marko


    And the markets would probably sell off new US war. It was quote-unquote. But I don’t really give that more than a 50, 60% chance, but it’s still there. Certainly there.

    Tony Nash


    Their Air Force is like F-4s made in the ’60s or something, right?

    Albert Marko


    I mean, it’s a joke. I saw that tweet and I’m just like, They’re like, Bring it on, America. I mean, we can send some kids to PlayStations, hooked up to DJI drones to take those out. I mean, that’s a joke. Yeah.

    Tony Nash


    Right. So I remember this close friend going around for the past day or so where it’s George Bush from 2001 or whatever talking about the coalition. And then he says, Now watch my golf drive, or something like that, right?

    Brent Johnson


    Yeah.

    Tony Nash


    And it was like the perfect early 21st century American moment. And at that time, a lot of these countries jumped into the coalition, whether they felt forced to or supporting America or whatever. But the sense I’m getting is that the Europeans, although they have claimed to be part of the coalition, they’re not really doing that much.

    Albert Marko


    This is a perfect example of a unipolar world where the dominant superpower of the United States conducts maritime security globally. Nobody else can do that. And you can see that from the-

    Brent Johnson


    I’m glad you brought this up. I’m so glad you brought this up.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Seychelles jumped on this.

    Tony Nash


    Seychelles are the difference-maker in this coalition, right? They are going to-

    Albert Marko


    Yeah. This is why the US is a reserve currency. This is why we are a unipolar world still and for the foreseeable future. There is nobody else that can send ships and rockets and the helicopters and manpower globally to choke points that trade flows through. This is the United States’s world and we’re seeing it right now.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah, but the PLA has thousands of ships, 94 % of which are small fishing boats, right?

    Albert Marko


    Oh, yeah. tonnage matters at some point. Whenever you talk to a real military expert, tonnage matters. When you have 21 aircraft carriers versus 5,000 fishing boats, they’re not going to matter much.

    Tony Nash


    Right.

    Brent Johnson


    Well, I think this is important, I think, for people to think about because I obviously get in a lot of these debates regarding the US hegemony and still a unit of polar power and the US dollar. And I’ll often get the comment that aircraft carriers and Navy Forces are no longer important due to hypersonic missiles and all this nonsense. But here’s the thing. Number one, I don’t believe that that’s true, but let’s just pretend that it is. Let’s just give those people who say that the benefit of the doubt and let’s say that is true and some a large war scenario, they’re sitting ducks. Well, there’s a lot of stuff that goes on that’s not a large war scenario. And the fact is that the US Navy for several decades has kept the shipping lines open from things like the. Remember 10 years ago, Captain Phillips and the Ethiopian pirates? That has helped keep prices down for everyone, not just for the United States. Now, does it benefit the United States? It absolutely benefits the United States. They’re not altruistic in this, but it helps the rest of the world, too. And if the US was not the hegemon and was not doing this, prices would be higher everywhere.

    Brent Johnson


    Insurance rates would be higher everywhere. The lead time to get shipments from around the world would be much longer. And so I think that’s one-.

    Tony Nash


    And insurance would be higher, right?

    Brent Johnson


    The insurance would be dramatically higher. And so that has inflationary effects, right? And so this whole thing that Albert is talking about with the Red Sea, this has the potential to keep rates higher for longer with the Fed. This is how potentially Fed rate cuts might not happen as quickly as are forecasted, or even if the Fed cuts do come, may not have as significant impact on the markets because of what’s going on. In other words, they may have to be cutting in order to protect against deflation-based monetary forces as a result of market selling off because oil spiking and there’s more geopolitical conflict in the Red Sea and the greater Middle East. And so this is just another part of what I was saying earlier is that markets are priced to perfection based on monetary policy, but there’s a lot more going on than just monetary policy. And there’s so many different ways that this can go wrong. It doesn’t mean it will go wrong. It just means I think markets move on expectations and they are now fully expecting the markets are fully expecting several cuts. And if those several cuts don’t show up, markets are not going to be at the same levels they are right now.

    Albert Marko


    They’ve been wrong for two years on this pivot, pause, cut, so on and so forth. So I have no trust on these five, six Fed cut stories out there.

    Tony Nash


    275, basically.

    Albert Marko


    Okay, sure.

    Tony Nash


    Okay. Guys, I want to talk more broadly about geopolitical risk, okay? Because I don’t know that a lot of people understand. When the 2008 financial crisis hit, investment banks just gutted their geopolitical risk desks. Since then, I don’t know of really any major banks that have, maybe credible is too strong of a word, but credible geopolitical risk analysis. A lot of that’s been outsourced to relatively small firms. Am I wrong on this? I don’t feel like we really get a lot of credible geopolitical risk analysis from the banks, from the guys who should be able to price risk. Am I off there?

    Albert Marko


    They don’t. Goldman Sachs has a new geopolitical division. I really haven’t talked to them or seen what they’ve written, but just going on from previous interactions with the financial industry and geopolitical analysis, it’s been truly awful. It stems from them being so polar opposite, where finance guys absolutely do not believe that geopolitics makes a difference up until about six months ago. And now they’re flipping because they’ve gotten blown out in their portfolios and they have to blame something and it’s geopolitical. So now they’re all going towards the geopolitical analysis, but they’re not good. Still not good.

    Brent Johnson


    Well, not only that. You got to remember the investment banks that put out research and the big commercial banks, they’re basically sales pieces. It’s very hard for an analyst at a major firm to come out and say something very negative. It’s not impossible, but it’s not easy. And even when they do try to put out something negative, their higher ups will say, hey, can you smooth this out a little bit? Can you say this a little bit softer? Because at the end of the day, they want people invested. They want people buying things. They don’t want people to hunker down and do nothing, right? And so I tend to agree with your point, Tony. They don’t really have these groups to begin with. But even when they do, you’re not going to get the same unvarnished truth that you would at perhaps an independent geopolitical firm.

    Tony Nash


    And so we’ve got small geopolitical firms largely based in New York or DC or London. I used to be with one of them, and these are not people who have field experience, none. They’re basically, it’s secondary research. They’re largely reading, and I just want to make sure that our viewers understand this, they’re largely reading English language publications in these countries to come up with their assessments. They don’t really know what’s going on. It’s filtered through English language, whether it’s Reuters or some local newspaper or something like that. That’s really what geopolitical risk is today with the geopolitical risk firms that you know that can come out. We don’t need to name names, but the ones that come off your tip of your tongue.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Or even worse, the big think tanks.

    Tony Nash


    In the US. Sorry?

    Tracy Shuchart


    I said, Or even worse, the big think tanks in the US, and I’ll just say that and I won’t name names.

    Tony Nash


    Well, no. I mean, look, the big think tanks in the US, there are not a small number of their leadership who are boards of Chinese companies. They’re government funded as well.

    Albert Marko


    They’re just so bad, Tony. I just had a discussion this morning with a finance guy at a firm up in New York. And he’s furiously texted me because I think they were trying to make a bond position. They’re like, Oh, Lavrov’s plane landed in the United States. The Russian diplomat, the foreign minister. The war is over in Ukraine. I’m like, What the hell are you talking about, man? That’s most likely a taxi ride for the diplomats to go back for the holidays to Russia. That’s not some bond move. You’re completely mispricing everything and making assumptions where you don’t have expertise on doing, and they do that often, and that’s why they’re so bad.

    Tony Nash


    Right. Now, I want to bring us back to crude, Tracy. If we have geopolitical risk rising in the Middle East why are we seeing that in crude prices right now?

    Tracy Shuchart


    Well, first of all, this whole episode is a shipping move. I’ve reiterated that over and over and over again in Twitter because everybody said, Why isn’t oil moving? Because there’s no risk to oil. Unless you see the Houthis lobbying missiles at a Ramco again, there’s no risk to oil. Production is fine in the Middle East. Production is not interrupted. This is not an oil issue. Now, if you want to talk shipping and you want to talk, yes, now we have a shipping issue with not only containers, but also shipping with the tanker in oil and oil products market as well as they’re being diverted around Africa instead. In fact, we’re seeing tankers have been having to be diverted from Panama Canal for months now because of the things that are happening. It’s a shipping issue. You’re seeing shipping rates increase, and that you’re seeing a bounce in the container and the tanker markets. Right now.

    Albert Marko


    This goes back to what Brent was saying, though, with these outsized market moves, and this is what we’ve been seeing, any headline, geopolitical, economic, so on and so forth gets so blown out of proportion. And Tracy is right. This Hutho thing is not a risk to oil. This is ridiculous. They’re not going to start blowing up Iranian and Russian ships and Chinese ships. The Huthis rely on those people. So these outsized moves based on wacky headlines is here to stay, and it’s not definitely help.

    Tony Nash


    To my earlier point, people don’t know how to price this risk because geopolitical risk analysis is so bad. People don’t know how to price risks. You have all of this volatility around these items. Either they underprice and dismiss it, or they overprice it because people are sitting in suburban New Jersey or whatever. They have never been to the region, they have no idea what’s going on, and so they overreact. I know we need to wrap this up, but let’s just get into real nitty gritty on the Middle East for a minute, Albert, on this Yemen issue. The their allies are Iran, Qatar and really Oman, right? I mean, Qatar and Oman are Iranian allies. Is that fair to say?

    Albert Marko


    Yeah, the Russian. Well, yes, for the most part, but they’ve also had long-standing links with the Chinese and the Russians. I’ve even tweeted out that the Chinese have barges sitting offshore that sells arms to the Houthis, and nobody says anything about it.

    Tony Nash


    Right. Then the sitting on the other side of that is really the Saudi’s and the Emirates, right? Just in terms of Middle East dynamics, right?

    Albert Marko


    Yeah, and the israelis, yes.

    Tony Nash


    And the Israelis. Okay. But I doubt the Emirates and the Saudi’s would really say that Israel is their ally. They don’t really say that out loud, do they?

    Albert Marko


    No, it’s common knowledge. The Saudi’s and the Israelis have been defense partners for 30, 40 years. This is nothing new.

    Tony Nash


    Right. And so I think on one side of that, we have chaos, right? Iran and other stuff. And then we have order on one side, which is Saudi and UAE, very orderly societies, Israel, very orderly. So the one I can’t figure out, Albert, is Qatar, okay? Because very orderly place. There’s a massive US base in Qatar. So why are they allied with Iran?

    Albert Marko


    They’re not just allied with Iran, but they’re allied with Turkey on top of that. The little troika there sitting in the Middle East is because they see the Saudi as a threat to their monarchy. So they need to counterbalance that with the Iranians, the same way that the Indians counterbalance China with Russia. That’s just the basic layman’s terms of reason of why they’re aligned with the Iranians. They need a counterbalance.

    Tony Nash


    It’s just balancing out. It’s not that the countries are super empathetic to Iran. They’re just worried about Saudi. They’re enemy, my enemy, that thing.

    Albert Marko


    Yeah, exactly. That and the Iranians are also right across the street there. I mean, it’s not that far away. It’s just down through away. Their gas fields and the water are Yeah, exactly.

    Tony Nash


    Yeah. Okay, very good. Guys, this has been fantastic. Thank you so much for this. We’ve got a lot to think about going into 2024. Have great holidays and have a great week ahead and see you in the new year. Thank you very much.

    Tracy Shuchart


    Happy holidays.

    Albert Marko


    Merry Christmas, everybody. Happy holidays.

    Brent Johnson


    Happy holidays.