Category: Week Ahead

Learn more about CI Futures

In this episode, we’re joined by Isaac Stone Fish, who is the CEO of Strategy Risks. He’s the author of a book called America Second, and he lived in China for seven years.

We talk about how are foreign companies dealing with the political changes in China? Or what should they be paying attention to? We’ve seen changes in Xi’s team that, to be honest, weren’t all that unexpected, but seems unexpected anyway. It’s certainly a hard turn to the CCP’s commie roots. This tweet really underscores how desperate Xi is to set an old school tone.

Markets have seemed a little spooked this week, so we saw orders from Beijing to prop up the CNY and Chinese equities, which didn’t work all that well. But with all the political and market backdrop, what does all of this mean for US and other foreign businesses? Are foreign employees at risk? Do we expect direct investment to slow down?

On the risk side, we look at tech earnings, which are super bad. Hiring is a huge issue and tech firms seem to have been hiring based on their valuation not based on their revenues. When will we see headcount reduction announcements? One of Meta’s investors was saying they should cut 20%. Albert shares his views on this.

And we’re also looking at crude oil inventories and refined product inventories. They’re way below averages. We saw another draw on global inventories this week. As OPEC supply is contracting ~1.2m bpd. Russian crude sanctions start soon. And US exported 5.12m bpd last week, making it the 3rd largest crude exporter. We know global inventories are low, but when will it start to bite? Tracy shares to us what’s going in.

Key themes

1. China risk for Western companies
2. Tech earnings & China
3. Crude inventories & Asia stockpiling

This is the 39th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Isaac: https://twitter.com/isaacstonefish
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Time Stamp:

0:00 Start
1:00 Key themes for this Week Ahead
2:52 What the news about China means to Western businesses
6:38 What has changed around the concept of Communist Party membership over the last ten or 15 years?
8:20 Anybody who’s overseeing a business in China has to understand modern Chinese history
9:31 Risks for foreign staff in China
12:34 Congress does not want US companies to do business with China
14:14 Danger of a rush to the exits in twelve months
17:58 Tech earnings are super bad – how bad will layoffs be?
21:10 Is it possible to cut 20% of Meta’s workforce?
22:44 China and US competition in India and other countries
24:52 Crude inventories – when will this start to bite?
28:31 Japan is stockpiling crude – is it because of geopolitical concerns?
29:47 China stimulus – will they do it in February?
31:55 What happens to the crude demand of Covid Zero ends?
34:27 Will oil prices raise by 30% before 2022 ends?

https://open.spotify.com/episode/1fZHZKL9Ng4duslCX6hrn9?si=d443da3ed30744bf

Transcript

Tony Nash: Hi, everybody, and welcome to the Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. Today we’re joined by Isaac Stone Fish. Isaac is the CEO of Strategy Risks. He’s the author of a book called America Second, and he lived in China for seven years as the New York Times in New York Times bureau. So we’re really lucky to have Isaac with us. We have Albert Marko, of course. And Tracy Shuchart. We’re very fortunate to have them again today with us.

So, Isaac, welcome and we’re really happy to have you.

Our theme today that we’re going to talk through first is how are foreign companies dealing with the political changes in China? Or what should they be paying attention to? 

On the risk side, we’re looking at tech earnings and the impact that tech earnings will have on other earnings and headcount reductions and other things over the next few months. And we’re also looking at crude oil inventories and refined product inventories. They’re way below averages. 

And we want to hear from Tracy as to what’s going on. 

Please take a look at our product, CI Futures. It’s a forecast subscription product. It’s $99 a month. We cover a few thousand assets over a twelve month horizon. Economics, currencies, commodities, equity indices. So please take a look at that. The URL is on the screen. Thanks a lot for that.

So, Isaac, welcome. Would you give us a quick overview of what Strategy Risks does?

Issac Stone Fish: Strategy Risks works with corporations and investors to help them manage and reduce their China risk. And with increased tensions between the United States and China, and growing awareness of the liabilities in both China and the United States of working with the People’s Liberation Army or the United Front or the Ministry of State Security or the Chinese Communist Party more broadly, it’s been a good couple of months for us.

And so excited to be joining you and chatting with you on these issues.

TN: You must be working 24 hours a day. I have no idea how you stay, how you get any rest right now with all the stuff that’s going on in China. 

ISF: Under drugs right here.

TN: Isaac, I’m curious, with all of the political changes announced this week, of course, that’s been way analyzed, a lot of different perspectives on things. I would warn people as they read through that analysis, just be careful of kind of some anti China bias, but we have to kind of read things for what they are too.

We saw changes in Xi’s team that, to be honest, weren’t all that unexpected. People have talked about this for months, but the fact that he actually carried through with it, I think made people feel like it was a little bit unexpected. 

But it’s certainly a hard turn to the CCP’s communist roots. I’m showing a Tweet right now looking at Xi taking his team to pilgrimage where the long march ended during the Communist revolution. And so he’s just the optics around the hard turn to the party’s communist roots are front and center.

So Isaac, markets were spooked this week. Of course, we saw orders from Beijing to prop up CNY and prop up Chinese equities. Obviously didn’t work very well. But with that backdrop, what does all this mean for US and other foreign businesses? I know it means a million things, but if you had some top level takeaways, what are the things that you’re seeing that it means for, say, US and other foreign businesses in China?

ISF: Have a really good understanding of leftist ideology. If you decide that you want to stay, which oftentimes we discourage, and if you decide that you don’t want to reduce your exposure, which we always discourage. Have a really good understanding of how Communism works, and read the tea leaves. Spend a lot of time on analysis. Understand that every Chinese company or every company in China that has at least three party members has to have a party cell. And for a long time people overlook that law.

But companies like Alibaba have tens of thousands of party members. So understanding that you’re partnering with the Chinese Communist Party and things that you used to be able to get away with, you can’t anymore. I think the other high level take away is with increased media, consumer and congressional scrutiny on China. 

What happens in China doesn’t stay in China. So the work that you do with a major Chinese charity which does say party building exercises in Chinese orphanages, aka Brainwashing Chinese Children on Party ideology, we can get that information here. Congressional staffers can read that, journalists can pick that up, and you’re going to have to start dealing with the liability of that from a PR perspective. The final highlevel takeaway, the more Xi marches to the left, the more draconian things get. And the more saber rattling we see with Taiwan, the more likely it is that the US and China go to war over Taiwan.

Right now, I would say that’s still not the base case. War is very avoidable. It probably won’t happen. But it’s a very concrete risk and investors and I would argue especially boards of major corporations, need to be discussing this risk. And perhaps the best thing to do with the risk is to say, okay, we know this, we’re not going to change. 

But I think if there is a war, companies are going to have to face some pretty serious shareholder lawsuits because it’s a viewable risk and you didn’t do anything about it.

TN: Right. So let me ask you, take two questions. First is, in 2010 or ’11, I spoke at the Central Party School in Beijing, and the person who drove. I was giving an economic update. I was working with the Economist at the time, and it was so surreal for me. The person who drove me to that event was a venture capitalist. And so I think the view that many people have of Communist Party members is, oh, you know, they’re these soft guys, they’re capitalists like us too, you know, that sort of thing. What has changed around the concept of Communist Party membership over the last ten or 15 years?

ISF: Think of the perception. So when Rupert Murdoch in early 2000s was going into business in China, he would downplay the importance of the Communist Party and say things like, oh, they’re just like us, there’s really no difference. And some people just join the party for opportunistic reasons, and some people do it because they believe, but they’re fairly soft spoken and gentle. And then there’s the very hard security element of the party. 

And I think people are realizing that for every venture capitalist, there’s also the PLA secret agent or the MSS agent or the public security agent in that these people are increasingly important in the Chinese system. 

And the other piece of it is that it used to be seen from a Western context, both PR and regulatory, relatively benign to be working with party members in the Communist Party. But after the genocide in Xinjiang, after Xi’s increasing authoritarianism, people are not getting the pass that they had before when you and I were out there.

TN: Right. And so I think it’s really critical. Anybody who’s overseeing a business in China has to understand modern Chinese history. You have to start from the great famine, really. I mean, start from the revolution, but really the great famine through the Cultural Revolution, through the 70s, through Deng Xiaoping, through… That era is really critical to understand what’s happening today. Right. Because that’s when Xi Jinping grew up and that’s when his ideologies were formed. Is that safe to say?

ISF: Good is safe to say. I think the other thing that we have to understand is we do have to be incredibly humble about our ability to understand what’s going on at the top of the party. We have very little idea. People are going to keep speculating about that crazy video with former Chairman Hujing Tao. We probably won’t know what happened there for decades, I would guess.

And I think when we talk about war with Taiwan, we talk about what’s going to happen between the US and China, we have a lot of insight into how Biden thinks and almost none into how Xi Jinping thinks. We just need to bake that into our predictions.

TN: Yeah, that’s absolutely right. And I cautioned on that earlier this week about the Hoojin Tao exit. It could be health, you don’t know. Right? It could be intrigue. You don’t know. So none of us know. 

So let me also ask you, when you talk about you had a tweet about potential China-Taiwan war earlier this week, and you talked about Chinese staff for American companies or Western companies, sorry, and you talked about Western staff in China. So can we talk about some of those risks, like the real people risks for multinational companies who hire Chinese employees. And none of this is intended to be Xenophobic.

This is intended to be purely practical in understanding really what the risks are. And also with those foreign staff in China. Can you help us understand some of those risks?

Tracy Shuchart: Yeah, I was going to ask something along that line, if I can just tag on my question to that one. We saw a bunch of people who are Americans pulling their staff from Chinese chip companies right, lately. So I was wondering if you saw that, see that trend continuing and bleeding into other sectors besides just the tech sector.

ISF: I very much do, and I think there’s two ways to think about this. One is the economic and regulatory so increasing difficulty doing business in China, desire for localization of staff, Biden regulations that restrict the ability of Americans to work at certain Chinese chip companies. And then you have the potential for war. 

And the idea is that if the US and China go to war, American staff in China and also Chinese staff for certain American companies could be seen as enemy combatants. And we saw this with Afghanistan, we saw this with Ukraine. There’s orders of magnitude, more staff for Western companies in China than in these places. I mean, it’s not even comparable, the numbers. 

And I think from an ethical perspective, I get really worried that people don’t talk about war because then war could just be on us. And the United States has a terrible history of interning Japanese during World War II and harassing Germans during World War I. I think with the dynamic with Chinese people here, we need to have a concrete conversation about it so that we can defend the rights of Chinese and Chinese Americans in America if we go to war. 

And from a corporate perspective and from a risk perspective, companies need to have exit plans for their staff in China because they’re going to be dealing with major, major ethical and insurance risk issues if this happens. And they can’t just take the foreign staff out to Hong Kong anymore. Because that’s not like a free zone anymore. And you hear stories of people being smuggled out now, and I think we’re going to hear a lot more of those, and that’s going to be more and more common.

TN: So, Isaac, what are we missing when you see the discussion about China right now and with American businesses, what are we missing? What’s not being discussed that you’re like, Gosh, I can’t believe people don’t see this.

ISF: Congress does not want American companies to do business in China. And with the UFLPA, the Uighur Forced Labor Prevention Act, we talked to a lot of corporates about that, and they don’t seem to understand how to comply with the law. And that’s the point. It’s a law that’s meant to deter behavior as opposed to shape behavior. 

So it’s okay, we can’t invest in Xinjiang, but this company that we work with, has a branch of Xinjiang. Well, don’t work with that company. And I think the American political calculus of this too. 

People don’t really get Pelosi’s trip, I think didn’t really bake into corporate behavior in the way that it should have because people think this is a Republican issue. They hear Marco Rubio, they hear Ted Cruz, they hear some of the awful remarks that Trump made, and they don’t realize that Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer sound almost exactly like Rubio and Cruz on these issues. They think it’s a Republican issue. It’s not a Republican issue. There are holdouts on the progressive left, there are holdouts on the libertarian right. But the US is pretty united about this from a government perspective.

It’s just not from a business perspective. And that’s fine. You can have that discordance. But businesses need to understand main street and Congress feel very differently about these issues than they do.

TN: Yeah. So one last question on this. Unless Albert, Tracy, you guys were going to come in, but do you think we’ll see publicly traded American companies disposing of their China units with say a Hong Kong IPO? 

I mean, I know this is an old idea, but better than nationalization, at least they can get some value of it. And I think of like a GM or something like that, right? It’s a huge business for them. So they could potentially either have that nationalized or they could make it public on the Hong Kong stock exchange or something. 

So do you think we’ll see more of this? Young Brands is the one that everyone knows about from ten years ago or whatever, but do you think we’ll see more of this? And if people don’t do it now, is there a danger of a rush to the exits in say twelve months?

ISF: I think that’s an excellent point. Ping on, which is a major shareholder of HSBC, suggested HSBC break up into two different banks, one headquartered in Hong Kong to focus on China market and one of the rest of the world. 

And companies like Boeing, which has an airplane business that I think it’s something like 14% to 18%, goes to China, specifically the Chinese Communist Party and then has a very important government contracting business which is increasingly at odds with its relationship with the Chinese Communist Party and need to start considering these issues. 

I think you’re right also on the timing, these things take a lot of time and companies are very private with them for obvious reasons. So if they’re considering them now and we’re going to see announcements on it and it doesn’t require that much scrutiny from Cyphius or the Beijing’s regulatory Agency or other Beijing other Chinese agencies, I can see these things happening.

I think if companies are starting to think about it now, it’s probably too late. I think years process. But in the same way that nobody wants to talk about war, nobody wants to talk about spinning off their China assets.

TN: Right. But you either do it now or it gets nationalized. Or you do it for $0.10 on the dollar in a year or two years.

ISF: I think you’re exactly right. And Tony, we should write something on this, and I think this is a good time to talk about this issue.

Albert Marko: Okay. There are other issues. Capital flight out of China, even if you decide to list in Hong Kong, is like, where’s the money going to come from? It’s not going to come from the west. Even the Chinese are starting to take their money out into Singapore and Macau  and anywhere else they can get it out of at the moment.

But I agree with Isaac on 90% of what he’s saying. I don’t think that war, Taiwan is even a remote possibility in the next ten years, to be honest with you.  The pilot bureau, Xi is inspired politburo. It looks scary. There’s no question about that. And the Western companies need to take a look at that because it reminds me of the Nazis from the 1930s.

Now, I’m not talking about what the Nazi crimes were, but just the mobilization of the country and the nationalization of corporations and then starting to boost the economy internally. It’s most likely going to start happening, and they will nationalize companies that they see are instrumental for their vision going forward.

TN: Yes. I mean, honestly, I don’t know why anybody related to SAIC Shanghai automotive. Why would that not become the property of SAIC? If they’re really taking this nationalist bent, that’s a real risk, right? I think so. Any of these guys really need to pay attention and really start to evaluate what is their path going forward? What is their path for Chinese staff? What is their path for foreign staff there? What is their path for IP that’s shared between those units? These are real head scratcher questions. 

Okay, Isaac, thank you so much for that. This is so insightful. I’d love to spend 2 hours with you on this, but we’ve got to talk about tech earnings.

So, Albert, tech earnings are super bad, right? Super bad.

AM: Super bad is an understatement.

TN: Yeah. Horrific. It’s a tech wreck, all that stuff. So we can talk about what missed and kind of we all know what’s missed. That’s been analyzed over the last 24 hours or say a few days or whatever. But I guess what I’m most interested in tech is staffing. 

So the vacancies in the US. Workforce has been a big issue for the Fed. Okay. And I’m showing right now on the screen that the Meta’s stock price from $350 all the way down to I think it was $97 yesterday, just over one year. It’s incredible, right? 

So a lot of these tech firms have been over hiring. They’ve been putting out job wrecks for things that they where they just want to target one person and they don’t really want to target the job and all this stuff. They’ve almost been hiring based on their valuation rather than their revenues. So in terms of those productivity metrics, do you think we’ll start to see headcount reduction in tech? Or they’ve been saying, hey, we’re just going to slow down our hiring.

So do you think they’re going to stick to only slowing down their hiring? Or do you think we’re going to see this kind of tech halt and kind of shrink the tech workforce?

AM: Oh, absolutely. You got to shrink the tech workforce. But that’s not going to come till after midterms. I mean, nobody wants to be in the line of sight of Biden’s firing squad over firing 10 thousand people just before midterms happen. But afterwards you will. Probably after Christmas, you’ll actually start seeing quite the number of job layoffs in the tech industry.

TN: Every time I’ve worked with a tech related firm, the pink slips come literally the week before Christmas.

AM: Yeah, you know what I mean? I don’t think that people understand how bad these tech earnings are. Right. We can note Facebook and Amazon and whatnot, but they had tailwinds of inflation of an extra 10% because CPI, they say 8%. It’s really like 20%. So they had an extra 10% baked into their earnings that people don’t really catch. Right? And even with that, they’re down 30, 40%. 

Amazon lost 25% in two days. Amazon. These are just astronomical. Which is a solid company. I love Amazon. I don’t have any… Company. Yeah, it is a solid company. And I like Amazon, I like the tech, I like the delivery service. And everything they do is correct. But I mean, realistically, they were, them and along with another dozen tech names were so over inflated for the last two years because the market just kept pumping up to just the high heavens that this was just I mean, it was an easy call that tech had to come down.

And on top of that, tech is based on zero rates. We’re not going to see zero rates for years.

TN: Right, that’s fair. Okay, so, you know, one of the hedge funds, I can’t remember who, was pushing Meta or Facebook now, I guess, again, to cut 20% of their workforce. Do you think something like that is possible?

AM: And it sounds like a lot, but given what’s happened with their valuations, do you think a 20% cut is possible? Do you think more or less is possible? And 20% is a lot. Usually when you have over 12%, you start looking at a company as going into bankruptcy. That’s one of the signs that you look at. So 20% is way too much. I don’t think that’s going to happen. Maybe seven to 10% staggered over the next few years.

TN: Okay, that’s fair. But I mean, they hire a huge number of people. What that would do to wages in tech would be immediate, right? $300,000, 22-year-old dev, that would be gone.

AM: Well, yeah, that cuts into the state’s budgets also because they take those tax revenue and whatnot. The other thing that we should talk about is China’s mix with the tech industry. I mean, now that the US congress, like Isaac was saying, is actively trying to prevent companies to go over there, I don’t know where tech earnings are going to come from. I just don’t see it. They’re taking away massive market share. They’re taking away supply chains and semiconductors and everything. I don’t see any silver lining in tech for the next two, three years.

I think they need to run size their organizations and really focus. Plus there’s more competition in the ad market, so you’re not going to see ad rates necessarily rise from here for some time.

So, yeah, I think there’s a lot of headwinds. I actually have to get Isaac’s opinion on this one is no one is talking about the tech industry in China competition with American companies in countries like India. Right? Because you have Chin Data and a couple of other countries that are massive and makes generate a ton of cash out of there.

And nobody’s talking about the competition level in India between the two. And I don’t know if you’ve heard anything, Isaac, but like, that’s something that I wanted to start looking into.

ISF: I think that’s an excellent point, is it doesn’t get nearly enough attention. And the market for the rest of the world for most of these companies is larger than the market for the US and China combined. There are a lot of contested spaces, especially in countries like India, Brazil, Indonesia. 

And I think the lens through which we should see it is the political battle between the US and China because both countries are really pushing all of these third countries to be more sympathetic towards their way of view because so many of these tech companies can be hobbled by regulations. We see that with Huawei. We see that a lot in India where there’s a lot of distrust for Chinese tech companies, a lot of restrictions on the ability of Chinese tech companies to operate.

And so it’s protectionist, but it’s good political warfare for both sides to be making these arguments in countries around the world. And it is good business for these companies to be spending heavily on government affairs in all of these companies, in all of these countries and figuring out how they position their relationship with the government, whether it be the Chinese government or the US.

AM: Yeah, and that’s something I actually criticized the Biden administration that they’ve been so hard on India about using Russian tech and Russian oil. It’s like, come on, you guys got to be a little bit pragmatic here. You know what I mean? They’re stuck between a rock and a hard place with China and Pakistan.

TN: True.

ISF: I think that’s a great I mean, they buy huge amount of weapons from Russia, and they buy those in large part to defend against China.

TN: Yeah, very good. Okay, great. Thanks for that, Albert.

Now, Tracy, let’s move on to crude inventories. I’ve got a Tweet up where you talk about there was another draw this week.

And we saw a draw on global inventories. As we have inventory drawdowns, we have OPEC supply contracting by what, about 1.2 million barrels per day, something like that. Russian crude sanctions starting. We also have with the SPR, it was interesting to see the US became the third largest exporter of crude, I think last week or something, with over 5 million barrels per day because of the SPR draw. 

So we know global industries are low, but when does that start to bite? I feel like the easy answer is well, after the SPR stops, right? What more to the story is there?

TS: I mean, I think it really depends on where you are. I mean, we’re already seeing the SPR. Those draws are kind of dwindling down, right? We’ve gone from about seven, 8 million barrels per week to 3.5 million. Even though that’s still a lot. That’s been part of the reason why we’re exporting, because we kind of, first, we were drawing down sour crude because that’s really what US refiners need. But at some point, that’s almost gone, so we had to start releasing sweet crude, and we can’t do anything with those barrels. And so they are making their way to China, they are making their way overseas.

And that’s why our exports have increased over the last few months there. In particular, we’re kind of seeing an uneven balance where we’re seeing global inventories are drawing, still drawing, right? US inventories are drawing, by all intents and purposes. I mean, we had, what, a 2.8 million build, but we also had a 3.5 million SPR release and an adjustment factor of 15.8 million barrels. Technically, we are drawing. And really, if you include the SPR, we had a draw of 5.9 million barrels total crude plus products this week.

But we are seeing what’s interesting is we are seeing Japan. Their stocks are actually going up because they’re stockpiling mad right now. So they’re buying everything from everybody. It’s stockpiling, and they were giving subsidies for companies to buy that in their SPR. So Japan kind of had a different kind of way of looking at things and the rest worlds just dumping. But they’re literally stockpiling.

China did stockpile for a while, but really their SPR is down, obviously, from the 2020 highs. They’re not stockpiling as much. But with China, I know that there are many problems going on there, but if they increase those import quotas for the Teapots, then we’re going to start seeing them by a lot.

TN: By Teapots, you mean the small refinery?

TS: Is just correct, because they’re talking about possibly raising those import quotas. But we won’t really find that out until December, and that’ll be for into 2023.

TN: Okay, so just a question on both, well, in Japan, first of all. With the yen at these dramatic lows, they’re stockpiling and it’s hugely expensive for them. It’s not just kind of incidental decision, this is a really intentional decision for them to stockpile. So are they partly, do you know, are they partly stockpiling

on geopolitical concerns?

TS: Yes, absolutely. I believe so. And all around, because we really saw them that sort of started to kick off in March after Ukraine invasions. Same with LNG, right? They’ve always been huge importers of LNG, the world’s largest, but they’re importing even more because they’re kind of seeing what’s happening in Europe right now and they don’t want that to happen to them.

AM: I think it’s a little bit more than that. Also, I think that they see that we’re probably even got cues from the US that Japan is going to be a manufacturing hub to try to pick up the slack from China. So I think they’re preparing for that in 2023, 2024. And on top of that, the price of oil right now, that’s still discounting China not stimulating because once China stimulates, the demand is just going to skyrocket.

TN: Okay, all three of you guys want to ask about that China stimulus. So you guys all know China Beige Book, and they’ve been saying everyone’s really foolish for thinking China is going to stimulate, and they’ve been saying that for something like six months. Right? And I hear a lot of people say, oh, they’ll stimulate after the Party Congress. I said that too, and we still haven’t seen that. Do we think that we’re going to see stimulus in China, say, before Chinese New Year, which is what, February?

ISF: I would say absolutely not. I think the real stimulus for the Chinese economy, too, will be less a government led infusion of capital and more a relaxation of COVID concerns. 

And I think that’s going to be a lot more likely after Spring Festival than after the March Congress because, A, you have the appointment of the premiere, you have some important events there, but you also don’t have to worry about mass contagion with hundreds of millions of people wanting to travel.

So I think the base case for the opening of the economy and then potentially economic inflation is after the Congress, after Spring Festival. And who knows, it’s very hard to predict, but that would be my best guess for that.

TN: I think that’s really solid. What do you think about that?

AM: Yeah, I think COVID Zero policies are going to be still in place until March. There’s no question about that. I think stimulus happens around the same time that they think that inflation is under control. I think that’s pretty much their driver at the moment, because if they stimulate price of copper and oil and everything in the country is going to go to the moon and they know this. So I think it really depends on inflation. What the US can do to tame it.

TN: So when do you think they’ll think that inflation is under control?

AM: I think close around March after the US. And also the end of quantitative tightening and whatnot. So it’ll probably be a coordinated effort.

TN: Okay, so Tracy, if they just let go of the lockdowns, what does that do to crude demand?

TS: Well, definitely we obviously start to see that rise because they’re locking down millions of people at a time, you know what I’m saying? An entire city, and not for a couple of days. We’ve seen some cities lock down as long as two months. 

So I think as soon as they start relaxing that we’re definitely going to see demand come flooding into the market. 

And again, China hasn’t really been stockpiling this whole time during this, which they have a little bit from their lows, if you look at their SPR, but not a lot. Not as much as everybody thinks they are. Everybody thinks they are because oil prices are lower and they like lower oil prices. But really, comparatively speaking to how they purchased in the past, the SPR hasn’t been as much as most people think. 

AM: Okay, do you think that they could be? First of all, I don’t trust the data of China. I don’t have anything.

TS: Well, what we can see from satellite systems, right? We have no idea what their underground storage looks like or anything of that nature. But what we can tell and what we can track, what’s actually going into the country. 

AM: Do you think that they can hide that in tankers on the sea for a while?

TS: Yeah, absolutely. I mean, they’ve been known to do that before. Absolutely. They’ve used Myanmar,

AM: Singapore also, I believe.

TS: Well, Singapore is a little bit harder to hide just because it’s so huge and so many people are tracking vessels there. So they kind of like to kind of stay away from there when they’re kind of trying to hide stuff.

But definitely, I mean, they’ve, you know, hidden purchases from Venezuela through Singapore, through other ports in that area. From what you can see from the best guess. From the best guess, what you can see, what you can tell what satellite services have picked up, like Kepler or whatever.

TN: OK, let me kind of close up with this question. So I just filled up with gas in the US last night and I posted this price in Texas is $2.95. So I’m sure you’re all jealous. I said, will this be 30% higher by the end of the year? Because post election, SPR releases stop, other things? Do you expect gasoline to rise, say, as much as 30% before the end of the year since SPR release and other things are stopping? Or do you think we’re kind of in this zone that we’re going to be in for a little while?

TS: Well, I think that generally this is kind of lower demand season anyway, right? I mean, usually typically we don’t see prices really start to rise again until about mid December, just seasonally speaking, right before the holidays. Christmas in particular, and everybody goes on vacation, et cetera, et cetera.

But I think, I don’t know. 30% might be a lot for this year, but definitely for next year we’re going to have some problems because they took that last 10-15 million barrels and they pushed that out for December, so we’ll still have some releases then.

So I think they did that it was actually 14 million barrels that are left and so they did push those out until December. So they’re kind of going to triple it out in order to kind of control prices.

TN: Okay, so the selection bias for people telling me that I was right is wrong.

TS: I think it’ll probably depend on where you are in the country, you know, depending on the state. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, if you’re in the Northeast, you’re going to have a huge problem, right, because they have the same issues going on that Europe. They don’t have any pipelines, they don’t have any storage, and they don’t have any refining capacity.

So this winter, especially with the diesel shortage, you’ll probably see the highest gasoline prices, obviously in California and then the Northeast will be the next higher.

TN: And I just want to say to everybody, I’m not promoting the gasoline price as a reason to move to Texas. I mean, it’s all scorpions and rattlesnakes and really terrible bagels here, so please don’t move here. It’s just an incidental benefit of living in a place that’s a pretty rough place to survive.

So anyway, guys, thank you so much. Isaac, really invaluable. I don’t think we’re going to gotten this perspective from anybody else on earth, so I really appreciate the time that you spent with us.

Albert. Tracy. Thank you, guys. I always appreciate your point of view. So thanks very much. Have a great weekend. Thank you.

Learn more about CI Futures here.

We’ve had several policies that have hurt small businesses, especially since the advent of Covid. The US administration just implemented a policy to move gig/independent workers to employee status. How does this hurt small businesses? Carol Roth, our special guest for this episode, discussed that in this Week Ahead.

Also, we’ve seen a lot of negative news this week with producer prices, wages, consumer prices rising. One Twitter user asked what would Carol do if she was in charge? What would she do and how does she think it’d help?

Albert helped us look at the Fed and is the dovish Fed dead? We’ve known this for some time, and there were hopes for a pivot, but that seems to be over.

Tracy also talked about diesel inventories, which she talked about for a very long time. She helped us dig into that in this episode.

Key themes
1. US policy punishing small businesses
2. The dovish Fed is dead
3. Diesel inventories
4. The Week Ahead

This is the 38th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:
Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Carol: https://twitter.com/caroljsroth
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Time Stamp:
0:00 Start
0:48 Key themes for this week ahead
2:43 US policy on gig workers
7:48 Is this to slow down job creation?
10:00 What other things will make things uncompetitive for small businesses?
12:07 What adjustments would Carol Roth do if she’s with the Fed?
16:47 Debt buying and the Fed
19:00 Forecasts for some currencies
20:00 Does the Fed understand that this is a supply-induced inflation?
23:50 They’re not thinking through the political fallout
25:25 Is diesel priced in dollars globally? And what’s the impact?
28:00 How long does the diesel shortage last?
31:34 What’s for the week ahead?

Transcript

Tony Nash: Hi, everybody, and welcome to the week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. Today we are joined by Carol Roth. Carol is from Chicago. She’s the author of the War on small business. She’s got an amazing Twitter following an amazing Twitter presence. Carol, thanks so much for joining us. Really looking forward to getting your perspectives today. 

We also have Albert and Tracy and I’m looking forward to getting their views on the Fed and on energy today as well. The key themes today we’re looking first at US policies punishing small business. Carol has a really unique perspective, obviously a book on the broader implications of this, but there are some recent policies that she’s been focusing on that will talk about some of those things. 

Next. Albert will help us dig into the Fed. And are we looking at the end of the Dovish Fed? I think we’ve known this for some time, but there’s always kind of been some hope that there’s going to be some sort of pivot and that seems to be over. 

Next we’ll look at diesel inventories. Tracy has been talking about this for a long, long time, but it really seems to be coming to a head. So we’ll dig into that today as well. Please take a look at our product CI Futures. It’s a forecast subscription product. It’s $99 a month. We cover a few thousand assets over a twelve month horizon economics, currencies, commodities, equity indices. So please take a look at that. The URL is on the screen. Thanks a lot for that.

Before we move on, please like this video, please subscribe to this video. You’ll be able to see all of them and we really want you to be able to see us every week as we bring these in.

So Carol, thank you very much for joining us. I know you’re busy, really demanding schedule. It means a lot to us that you could join us. So thank you very much.

Carol Roth: This is an amazing crew and I can’t believe you left out recovering investment banker out of my introduction because that’s really the most important part,

TN: Right, exactly. And a Raiders fan as we learned last week over Twitter as well. So we’ll forgive you for that. Anyway, thanks very much. I love the work you do on small business. And you’ve been talking about a recent policy and we’ve got a tweet of yours on the screen talking about the Bind regime pushing gig employees to be full time employee status with companies. Can you talk us through what that means for small businesses and why is that a competitive disadvantage?

CR: Yeah, I think the first thing that people really need to understand is how important small business is to the economy. Because I think a lot of people think, oh, it’s small, it’s just a little piece. Before COVID, small business was about half the GDP and about half the jobs. And at this point we have about 32 6 million small businesses in the US.

So if you’re somebody who believes in the concept of decentralization and that being important to economic freedom, this is the decentralized portion of the economy. This is very independent. It’s very spread out geographically via industries backgrounds. Whatnot by the way which is why big business, big governments and big special interests don’t like small businesses because they’re very hard to corral. If you look at the other half of the economy, it’s in the hands of 20 plus thousand big businesses. So it really is that sort of David versus Goliath battle but also this battle between decentralization and centralization. And we have seen all of these efforts over a long period of time to destabilize small businesses and to make competitive advantages to really tip the free market in favor of those big businesses.

And certainly the policies around COVID right, were the biggest example of that ever. It was an epic wealth transfer from Main Street to Wall Street done not based on data and science but based on political cloud and connections. So now that we kind of know what the story is in terms of this unholy triumvirate, if you will, the big business, the big special interest, big government attacking small businesses, you then look as to what else they can do to really make it harder for small businesses to compete.

So there’s this Department of labor ruling that’s come out. It’s followed something called AB Five in California. If anybody has heard or followed what was going on in California and then it has been and passed the House on a federal basis under the Pro Act. But basically the idea is they want to take gig workers and independent contractors which by the way the estimates, they number around 53 million people in the United States. 

So again, this is not a small number of people who are being affected and they want to say you can no longer have the freedom to decide how you work. We don’t want you to be able to enter into a contract in a way that works for you. We don’t want you to have that flexibility. You have to be an employee. Now this may sound like, oh well, that sounds great for people.

Why would they not want to be an employee? Well, there are a lot of reasons why you don’t want to be an employee. The first is you might not have that opportunity. And that’s the biggest issue because it is very difficult. And the government are the ones who have made this very difficult for a company to hire their first employee and also to keep them on an ongoing basis. 

If you hire somebody as an employee versus a contractor, you have to pay in a portion to Social Security. It affects interest. It can affect your 401K or step plans. It just kind of reverberates throughout your business and so it becomes very challenging and difficult. So if you are a small business who maybe gets busy during a certain season or need help just in certain areas, you tend to bring on independent contractors. Or if you’re creative, if you’re running a movie, you’re obviously not bringing everybody unnecessarily as an employee. You might have a caterer who comes in and feeds people, or if you’re a hairdresser, you may want to rent out a chair in a salon. And the salon doesn’t have the wherewithal to make these employees.

So they’re framing this as we’re trying to help the employees. This is going to really stick it to big business. But there are literally hundreds and hundreds of different categories of employees. Anybody who’s a 1099 employee and doesn’t have a business entity that this will threaten not only their economic freedom, the ability to work the way that they want to be flexible, but literally their livelihoods.

So if you believe in choice, it should be your work, your choice. And now the Department of labor wants to give another giveaway to all of those big special interests.

TN: So, Kara, when we’re in an environment right now where the Fed is trying to slow down job

creation, our small company is the largest portion of job creation as well. So is that another tool potentially, maybe unintended or not, I don’t know to slow down job creation? 

CR: Yeah, I mean, certainly if you think of the small companies, they’re the ones that don’t have the financial wherewithal or the fortress balance sheets. They have not been loading up on the cheap debt because they have to personally guarantee it and don’t have the same scale as the big companies. So it’s a challenge for them to survive an environment where the Fed is going, we’re going to destroy demand. It’s basically we’re going to destroy the little guys who can’t endure this pain. So that’s small business. And you’re right. Having the ability to be flexible going, well, maybe I can’t hire an employee, but maybe I can hire somebody as a contractor parttime, and when things get better, I can bring them on as an employee. Or maybe this is just a flexible way that we can work in the future so we can have different people and they can also work with different companies in a way that suits them.

Absolutely. This is going to be on the shoulders of small business. And as they always do, they say, oh, this is an attack on Uber and Lyft. When this happened in California, Uber and Lyft went out and they put it on the ballot. They got an exemption, but they didn’t take everybody else with them. They just got it for a handful of big industries. And all of the other small guys were basically screwed.

So the idea that this is somehow in an attack in the front against the big guys and the small guys are going to come out smelling like a rose is a joke. If you believe that. I’ve got a bridge to sell.

TN: You right. Okay. So we have small businesses that just barely made it through COVID. So that was really a regulatory way to suffocate small business. And my company is one of them that scraped through and now we have these full time employee regulations coming in from the Department of labor. Are there other things on the horizon that you’re seeing that could make it even more uncompetitive for small businesses?

CR: I mean, everything that they’ve done is making it noncompetitive for small business, whether it’s regulation. You think about all of these minimum wage regulations and how these big companies like Amazon and Walmart have shifted their position and decided to lobby for them. Well, why do you think that is? That’s because they know they’re going to pay that level anyway and they don’t want to have the flexibility for the smaller companies to be able to maneuver around.

That certainly a higher interest rate environment messing with the labor force in general, let alone having a rule like this. The supply chains, the decisions that were made, whether it was a direct you have to close your business down or these indirect issues that affected labor supply, whatnot they killed by mandate around seven figures worth of small businesses. And unfortunately, Tony, as you’ve shared personal stories, there are many others that are just scraping by to survive.

And it’s just this like, you know, you get knocked down, you get up again and then they just keep knocking you down and you keep knocking you down. If you wanted people to succeed, if you wanted people to pursue the American dream, if you wanted economic freedom, you would be working to remove

barriers, make it easier for people to work, make it easier for companies to hire in the way that makes sense for both parties, and make it easier to be a small business. And every single thing that comes out

of government at all levels, by the way, it’s not just federal, but state and local is doing the exact opposite.

TN: Yeah, it’s overwhelming. We could talk about just that alone for hours. Let’s move on to former investment banker Warden Grad. You know your way around the economy. There is a tweet put out a few days ago asking you, if you had the big chair, what adjustments would you make to the economy, monetary policy, whatever, to change the environment today to make things better? What are a few things that you would do if you were Chair Powell or Janet Yellen or something like that?

CR: Burn the fed down. I burned down the Federal Reserve. The very first order of business, I put myself out of a job. And I say that kind of jokingly, but I like to clarify. I would take away the Fed’s powers because as I’ve said to many people before, the only thing worse than the Fed making monetary policy decisions and meddling in the markets and doing things like printing money and whatnot would be Congress doing that? So you don’t want to have those if you get rid of the Fed, you don’t want to have somebody else take away the powers. We’re really getting at, you know, getting rid of those powers to interfere. So that would be the first thing I would do.

But obviously that would not solve what is going on. Now. This is not going to be a surprise to any of you, but what we’re dealing with right now is a supply side imbalance. And it has been. They stimulated demand, but they stimulated it into a supply constrained economy. And so we are under supplied, as I know Tracy tweets about all the time in energy, certainly in labor, as we’re talking about food, housing, other commodities. So I personally don’t believe that the Fed has the tools to solve this problem and attack it. And frankly, I think that they’re going to just cause a massive amount of destruction not only here in the US. But reverberating through the global economy, which then swings back and has an impact on the US.

So what needs to be done, again, are policies that remove barriers to supply. What we’ve been talking about, certainly on the energy front, anything that we could do to stimulate supply of energy, which again, do it here, where we do it more cleanly, and not let China and Venezuela and all these countries that don’t do it cleanly be the ones to do that. Because the last time I checked, we all share the same air. It’s not like you believe in a smoking section, right? Like, oh well, they’re just smoking over there, we’re great over here in the same restaurant. Like, that’s so stupid.

So we would obviously do a 180 on energy policy. The same thing with labor. All the things we’re talking about make it easier for companies to hire people to go to work in the way that they want to work and then we close that gap in the labor market, which is insane. 

The same thing in housing. The National Association of Home Builders did a study last year. $94,000 in regulatory costs are added to the cost of every new home from the government. I mean, that’s insane. The average house is almost 4000. So like 25% of the cost is in regulation. And I’m not saying we don’t need anything, but that’s certainly excessive and it’s gone up by something like 30% to 50% over a very short period of time. So it’s those kinds of things that the policies need to be focused on stimulating the supply and shrinking that supply, demand and balance by increasing supply, not by trying to kill the demand. And that’s just where I land on it.

Albert Marko: That’s exactly what I was tweeting last few months now. And actually on the show is they are trying to create demand destruction, but the problem is the supply disruption that they’re creating and they put themselves in a doom loop to where when demand comes back, there’s no supply. So you get a cycle of inflationary situations happening, and it’s bad here, it’s worse in Europe and it’s even worse in Asia. So we’re going to be stuck in this until the policies start changing, not just from the Fed, but it’s got to be political also because the governments are doing this COVID zero in Asia and the energy crisis in Europe, and they’re just making it worse. So until those policies change, we’re going to be stuck in this cycle.

TN: Yeah. So I respect both of you, but the Fed doesn’t. So they’re going to do whatever the hell they want. What’s really interesting to me is you guys may have seen today. The treasury was asking investment banks. Hey. Do we need to buy some of the debt off of you so that we can create some liquidity in debt markets. Just basically transfer some cash to you so we can take some of those assets off your balance sheet.

Whether it’s the Fed or the treasury or whatever is done. It just seems like the benefit is for the small circle of people. And when you talk about whether it’s interest rates or QT or whatever, it seems like interest rates are the bluntest instrument that hit the biggest number of people. Right. And it’s hard for me to understand why that’s absolutely necessary.

And Albert, we’re going to segue into your section on the death of the Davis Fed. If we look at interest rates, we’re looking at a terminal rate about around 5% now. Right. And so help me understand what is happening with the Fed, what you’re hearing, what you’re seeing and what you’re expecting for the next couple of months.

AM: Well, I mean, everything at this point well, it should have been for a year now, but everything from this point on is strictly to combat inflation. They are getting screamed at by literally everybody to get the 5.5%. Not just five, they’re going to get the 5.5%. They’re going to do 75 again on this next meeting and then another 75 after that. And their intention is demand destruction. That’s what they’re going to do. And they’re not going to be dovish anymore. But they’re have to walk a tightrope here because Europe, they’ve destroyed so much in the global market, specifically Europe that lost 30 trillion in the bond market, that it could be a systemic problem.

And they can’t have that, so they’ll do 70. Five to 75. Talk guidance extremely hawkish. They’re intent on trying to get inflation down until November and December.

TN: November and December.

AM: They’re going to do 75 both. And they’re just going to have to because their time is out and they have

no more tools left to hit. Inflation at JPY at. Euro will be at 90.

TN: And JPY will be what?

AM: I don’t know the correlation on that one off hand, but the euro is definitely going to go to 90. 90 to 90 on this. But it’s all $30 trillion, Tony. That’s a lot of money. The only people in the money. Yeah, it’s still a lot of money. So when the treasury starts talking about, do we need to buy debt back from banks? Is that the US. Banks or is that European banks? Because I guarantee there’s going to be some European banks in there.

TN: Oh, they have to be. Yeah.

AM: Like I said, they’re causing systemic problems and they can’t have your completely blow up. I mean, they’ll use them for a scapegoat to stop QT announce QT stop. But that’s where we’re at it right now.

TN: Okay, so does the Fed understand that this is largely supply induced inflation?

AM: No, they don’t. They don’t? No, because people do what they know, right? If you go back and you look at what Yelen did, when I say Fed, I just toss in the treasury at the same time because they’re one of the same. They talk. They talk, and they have correlating policies and whatnot. And if you look back in 2013, this is what Yellen did last time. She drove the dollar up, crushed the markets, and drove all the money back into the United States. Yes, the United States market looks all beautiful at 3600 to 3700, and people talking about Fed pivots and 3900 in the es, but it’s not real.

CR: Okay, so first of all, can we just discuss the fact that between the time that Janet Yellen was Fed chair and Treasury Secretary, the woman pulled down over $7 million in economic speeches when she didn’t know how to handle, you know, coming out of quantitative easing. She didn’t see inflation. She said that I think this was actually from you, Tracy, but she said that everything looked great in the treasury markets and then the next day went, oh, yeah, I’m worried about liquidity. I mean, clearly, I’m not sure she knows anything. 

And I want to know how to get in on that gig in terms of making that money for speeches for something that you know nothing about. But I find it hard to believe since everybody and their brother has been talking about all of the issues that are going to happen here. 

And maybe it’s my wart and bias, but I go along with Jeremy Siegel, noted finance professor who’s been out there hammering the Fed, saying, look, first of all, you not only do you not necessarily have the tools we’ve seen some elements of demand destruction in small places, and it takes a while to work through the system.

So if you go too fast, kind of like you didn’t see it on the front side, you’re going to do the same thing and you’re going to overshoot. But the bigger issue alluding to what Albert said is the potential to drag down the global economy. I mean, that the fact that you can end up with currency crises, with a treasury market crises, the whole slew of risk assets could be a massive sale of risk assets so that they

could get their hands on dollars because the Fed wants to keep raising interest rates.

It just seems to me it’s not a question of do they not know this? It’s a question of what’s their intention are. They trying to drag down the global economy so there is a financial reset, so they can introduce some sort of a central bank digital currency and have an excuse for it. It just seems to me to go, oh, they’re ignorant of what’s going on. When every single one of us sees this, you’ve got the IMF talking about it, you’ve got professors talking about it.

The fact that this hasn’t crossed their mind with the people that are involved yelling aside, but the Powells of the world and other folks there, that just seems not very likely to me.

AM: No, it’s not. A lot of it is political right there’s. U.S. Midterms, they don’t want Trump back, so they start throwing in these economic numbers to make Biden Democrats look good. And that screws up Fed

policy going forward. I mean, Yellen takes a dollar up, the Fed gets stuck, and then they have to go back and create a new crisis in Europe or Ukraine or whatever crisis they want to create sometime in the future to blame for everything. Yeah, I think the Fed guys are smart. I think they do know these are not stupid people, although certain people, they. Know they just don’t care.

TN: I think you’re right. I think they don’t care. But what I think they’re not thinking through is the political fallout we saw that Chancellor or the exchequer in the UK kicked out today after about two weeks in office or something. And that’s relatively light compared to what happened in Sri Lanka a few months ago and what’s happening in Africa, what’s happening in, say, Pakistan, Bangladesh, what’s happening in Latin America.

So I think we’ll see political fallout here as a result of the Fed’s inability to understand the implications. Where it will really hurt is if it hits Japan and you get minority party in Japan back in power. They’ll pay attention then. And if you see powers in Europe that aren’t favorable to the US. But that’s already kind of starting to see Czech Republic and Hungary, certainly we’ve. Already started to see this, and it’s just getting started. 

We thought we saw populism in 2016. I don’t think we’ve seen anything yet. I think we’re going to see

this in a big way globally.

AM: Yeah, Tony, you’re right. I mean, the Europeans are absolutely screaming at yelling about this because she straight up lied to them about the bond market. She can’t even talk to the Norwegians

or the Swiss at the moment. This is how bad it’s become.

TN: Yes, I believe it. Okay, so let’s move on to energy. Tracy, you’ve talked a lot about distillates for a reason, warned us for months about diesel shortages and diesel prices, and it seems like it’s really coming back. And as you talk about this, I want to understand, is diesel priced in dollars globally? And so is that going to hit supply chains in other countries as well because of the pricing basis of diesel. Coming out of refineries

Tracy Shuchart: diesel’s price in local currencies and trade in local currencies. Products are crude, obviously, prices in dollars and traded that way globally, except for some instances. But products are generally like Nat gas, it’s traded in different currencies. But really, I mean, we were having a diesel problem. This started back in 2021, so this is nothing new. I was tweeting about it summer of 2021. I was really worried about distalates. I started tweeting about that then because I saw our inventory slow down. It’s even worse now. 

But what’s come to a head all of a sudden, and what’s making this obviously 10 million times worse, is that Europe, for instance, mostly bought diesel from Russia, and they’re trying to lean off of that, right? And so in the meantime, the US. Is trying to supply Europe with diesel. But now over the last week, we’ve had three weeks of ongoing refinery strikes with total. So France has 2500 gas stations that have at least one product that is completely gone, and 2000 of them are shut down entirely. And then we just had a malfunction in the Netherlands and Shells Curtis refinery, which is the largest diesel refinery in all of Europe. 

So right now we have a massive global problem that is just getting worse. And if you see the diesel crackspreads have been they’re ridiculously flowing out. And backwardation is flying right now, which is kind of obscene. In the meantime, we’re still drawing these distills. We had a 9 million build and a 4 million draw in distance, and we’re headed into winter. So we’re going to have major problems here already in the United States, particularly in the Northeast, because they don’t have the refinery capacity there to really supply that area.

TN: Okay, so what does that mean? How long does this last? Does it last into spring? Does it last beyond spring? I’m curious about the magnitude of the impact on price, but I’m also curious about the duration, how long this is going to last.

TS: Well, you know, I mean, this has pretty much been gone ongoing since 2021. We’ve had times where it’s worse and times where it’s not. But it’s been over a year now, over a year and a half now. I don’t see that going away anytime soon because we don’t have the supply. We don’t have enough heavy oil to, you know, to make these products globally, especially when you’re cutting off Russia, because that’s what they produce is heavy oil. You’ve got Venezuela that’s producing 700K bpd. They’re not producing anything. And most of that’s going to China to pay for debts. We don’t have them. We’ve got Canada, but we don’t want to build pipelines right. For that. We can import more for that. So, I mean, we have kind of a global shortage of heavier oils. And sure, we get some from the Middle East.

That’s fine. We get some from Saudi Arabia. They own motiva here in the United States. And certainly they do produce diesel, but it’s still it’s still not enough. And especially when you’re talking about the west, it’s talking about, you know, we’re talking about a complete oil embargo on December 5 of Russian

oil and oil products.

TN: So this isn’t something that’s done by January. This has legs for quite a while.

TS: Yeah, absolutely. We’re already seeing prices rise. We’re at 518 a gallon for diesel here in the United States on a national average, which is higher than gasoline prices, by lots higher than the average. And the gasoline people that I talked to at Opus basically say, man, this is not even a safe level. This is going much, much higher.

CR: I have a question for you, Tracy. So it seems to me everyone seems to be focused on getting through the winter in Europe and the immediate impacts, as if there’s, like, some magic solution waiting on the other side as more of a layperson in this area. It seems to me that this massive under investments, this supplied depression that we’ve been having, there’s nothing coming online to help with that. So doesn’t that suggest that this is something that doesn’t get sorted out even though there may be some volatility, but, like years and years and years that we’re going to be dealing with?

TS: Yes, absolutely. I mean, we’ve got a problem for the next eight to ten years. Really? And if you look at, you know I know if we look at the natural gas situation in Europe, everybody’s thinking, oh, we’re at 95% full before winter, we’re going to be fine. If we just make it through winter, that’ll be fine. That’s great and all, but if you are not replacing that, you’re going to need it in the summer. You need to keep refilling that. So it’s not like, you know, unless they decide to stop using natural gas in March, end of story, we still have a problem. Right. And the next winter is probably going to get even worse.

TN: Great. Just so you know. Awesome. Okay, so let’s move into kind of the week ahead section. Albert, you want to get us started. What are you looking at going into the week ahead? What’s on your mind?

AM: Continuation of the Feds 100 basis point rate hike. I mean, they’re not going to do 100, but they’ll tell the market that they might start thinking about it and the market might start pricing it in. So we’ll definitely have a lot of weakness in the market going ahead in the next week, but it’s midterms, so you never know,

 they could defend the quote unquote Trumpl ine of 35, 40 so they don’t look like complete idiots and give them Fodder for the midterms. Do you still think we’re going to hit maybe 3200 or something eventually? I can guarantee you that by the end of the year for sure. The economic indicators across multiple data sets is just atrocious right now.

TN: Okay, great. Carol, I know you’re not really kind of in Marcus, but what are you keeping your eye on for the week ahead?

CR: So I do actually commentate on markets from a sort of a macro perspective, and much like Albert, I’m sort of in the camp that until the Fed tells us what is their intention, is this really just about the midterms? Are they feeling the pressure that it’s risk off from my perspective until we know what’s happening with them. So that’s been sort of my perspective.

TN: Great. Okay. Thanks, Tracy.

TS: On China next week, party congress looking at China, I want to see what they’re going to do policy wise because that’s definitely going to affect the commodities market. We all know that they’re looking for a five 5% GDP by the end of the year, which they’re not going to get. They’ll say they got it, but we all know that they’re not going to get it. So I want to look, an economy is suffering right now and we’re starting to see stirrings of unrest in China. Right. 

There was just that article where they had the people on the bridge with the signs that got scrubbed from China Internet. But I think that she is going to have to do something to stimulate that economy. So I’m kind of looking to see what his focus is on that and if they have any plans going forward to simulate the time. Because again, that’s going to affect the commodity markets and to see if he has a plan for the housing market. Oh, he’s got a plan.

TN: Central planners always have plans, don’t they?  That’s right. So if you talk to any China economist

for the bank, they’ll tell you that China is going to hit five 5% or maybe they live on the edge and say five three. Right. So as you said, we know they’re going to make it issh somewhere in the ballpark, but we know in reality you can’t have a zero code environment and make a growth rate that high. So my worry, I was just talking about this with somebody earlier in the week, my worry is that China really has made that transition to a slower growth environment for starting with demographic reasons, but also some structural reasons that they put in place.

And I think what she’s going to talk through next week, although not directly, but someone indirectly, is much more control, which will lead people to the conclusion that it’s not a safe place for foreign investment anymore, which will lead them to a slower growth environment economically. Because he’s basically talking about leveling people out. Right. And everyone has the same maybe not opportunity, but the same outcome. And you can’t necessarily do that in China with some of the economic outperformers that you’ve had, like Jack Ma and other people. You have to bring people down instead of push people up. And that’s what I’m expecting. 

Again, he’s not going to say he’s going to bring people down, but that’s what I expect is the main message coming out of next week’s meeting.

AM: Yeah, he has already done that, Tony. And there is a little bit of a power struggle with Wang. Yang is actually slated to be power sharing with him. All they’re trying to get him to do that, but all my sources have said that they’re locking down for code with zero until at least March, so we’ll see what kind of fake numbers they come out with.

CR: I will add that this all ties into their social credit system, which is the most advanced one in the world right now. And they really started the social credit on the business front, which is notable for the reasons you were saying. You can’t have that capitalism that’s leaked in a little bit over the past several decades and have these outperformers. So it’s an easy way to sort of bring those folks down a peg and then let that bleed into sort of the individual social credit. And it’s something we should be paying very close attention to as the Fed keeps talking about things like Central Bank, Digital Currencies, and as we see these companies going after people for misinformation, what part of that could leak here as well.

TN: Yep, very worries. So okay, guys, thank you so much for your time. Carol, I’m so grateful that you can join us today. Please come back anytime. Really appreciate this, guys, and have a great week ahead.

Learn more about CI Futures here: https://completeintel.com/futures

In this episode, we’re joined by our special guest, Simon Mikailovich from the Bullion Reserve, along with regular guests Tracy Shuchart and Albert Marko.

First, we looked at systemic risk in the case for hard assets with Simon. When we look at recent events like the BOE intervention in the long-term gilt market, where does he think the next systemic risks could come from? Is it developed more market (European) debt?

Also, Simon discussed how we should be looking at the gold market now. Why is there a divergence between physical gold at the retail level and institutional demand for gold derivatives?

Next, we went into a little bit on OPEC cuts with Tracy. OPEC cut supply by 2m BPD. Everyone has talked about this. We’ve spoken in earlier episodes about a price spike in oil later in Q4, partly owing to SPR releases stopping or slowing. Is this even likelier now? Some US legislators are pushing a bill to break up OPEC. Is that even remotely possible?

And then finally, we took our first look at US midterms. Democrats now control both House and Senate. That’s a huge advantage for Joe Biden. For many reasons – inflation, crime, etc – Democrats are in trouble for November’s midterms, but will they lose control of both the House and the Senate? Albert discussed that in this episode. We’ll cover more of this in the coming weeks, but we want to have a starter conversation here.

Key themes:
1. Systemic risks and the case for hard assets (Gold)
2. OPEC cuts = Q4 Crude price whipsaw?
3. US Midterms
4. The Week Ahead

This is the 37th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:
Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Simon: https://twitter.com/S_Mikhailovich
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Listen to this episode on Spotify:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5d3Uw6hXoKw5WJWN8TYZba?si=ae5d36781b3845be

Transcript

Tony Nash: Hi, everyone, and welcome to The Week ahead. I’m Tony Nash. This week we’re joined by our special guest, Simon Mikailovich from the Bullion Reserve. Simon, thanks so much for joining us. We really appreciate it. We’re also joined by Tracy Shuchart and Albert Marko.

We’ve got a lot to dig into this week. The first we’re looking at is systemic risk. And the case for hard assets? We’ll dig into that quite a bit with Simon.

Next, we’ll go into a little bit on OPEC cuts with Tracy. You’ve all heard about it, there’s no secrets there, but what do we expect for crude prices in Q4?

And then finally we’ll take our first look at US midterms. I think we’ve got a lot to talk with Albert about over the next few weeks before US midterms, but we’ll just do a quick dive in this week.

So before we get started, please take a look at our product, CI Futures. It’s a forecast subscription product. It’s $99 a month. We cover a few thousand assets over a twelve month horizon, economics, currencies, commodities, equity indices. So please take a look at that. The URL is on the screen. Thanks a lot for that.

So, Simon, welcome and thanks for taking the time on a Friday. I know there’s a lot going on in markets, so it’s a huge compliment for you to be here. I want to ask about systemic risks, something you tweet about quite a lot. And we put a tweet, one of your tweets on screen.

You talk about the BoE commits to ensure unicorn in every pot. And this happened a couple of weeks ago, the Bank of England. And I’m really curious, when we look at events like the BoE intervention in the long term guild market, where do you think the next systemic risks could come from? And I guess, more specifically, do you expect those risks to come from developed, more developed markets or emerging markets or does it matter?

Simon Michailovich: First of all, it’s a very difficult subject because obviously you can spend hours and hours talking about it. It’s like the existential problems of our time. And I know we’re also going to talk about gold and systemic risk. What I think I’d like to do is I’d like to have a little parable that kind of explains, I think, or illuminates the situation that we’re in generally. And the dichotomy that may exist, I think exists between markets and life out there. 

And terrible comes from very appropriately named for the Times from Russia With Love, which is Ian Fleming’s story, one of the James Bond books. And just to set up this quote that I’m going to read to you, the situation is that James Bond is absconding with a Russian decryption machine on a train and it’s supposed to be met somewhere down the line by the British intelligence agents. And he’s accompanied by a much wiser and older head of station from Istanbul whose name is Kareem Bay.

And Kareem advises him to get off the train immediately because there’s existential danger. They’re being hunted and Bond wants to see this gamble through. And so Kareem tells him a little story which I’d like to read to you which I think kind of explains more or less or answers a question about systemic risk and generally what’s going on between the markets and events that we’re all observing through press but may not necessarily fully understand or yet appreciate their implications.

So what Kareem tells him, he says “you’re a gambler. To me, this is business, to you this is a game.” And then he puts a hand on his shoulder and he says, “this is a billiard table. An easy, flat, green billiard table and you hit your white ball and is traveling easily and quietly towards the end. The pocket is alongside. Fatally, inevitably you’re going to hit the red and the red is going to go into that pocket. It is the law of the billiard table, the law of the billiard room. But outside the orbit of these things a jet pilot has fainted and his plane is dining straight at that billiard room or a guest main is about to explode. 

It already has actually, in the real life with Nordstream or lightning is about to strike and the building collapses on top of you and on top of the billiard table. Then what has happened to that white ball that could not miss the red ball and to the red ball that could not miss the pocket. The white ball could not miss according to the laws of the billiard table.

But the laws of the billiard table are not the only laws. And the laws governing the progress of this train and of you to your destination are also not the only laws in this particular game.

And so the point is that for 40 years, the markets, the financial system and the economy has gone along with that, have lived by the laws of financialization, by the laws of the billiard room and of the billiard table and other laws that are outside the real economics more famine, pestilence, inflation have not entered into the equation. And so within the framework of the billiard table there is no, for example US Treasuries do not have credit risk. US dollar does not have counterparty risk. Banking deposits are safe, 100% safe. That’s by the laws of the billiard table. That’s by the laws of the markets.

So essentially this bubble, the everything bubble that the credit bubble that we have been in for x number of years. All the problems inside this bubble were nominal problems related to nominal values in financial markets. And those values can be fixed by creating additional money, by creating additional credit, by creating conditions, by providing liquidity. What cannot be fixed inside this bubble are real problems like energy shortage, like supply chain disruptions, like World War, like the fact that a significant number of other countries are suddenly developing their own ideas as to economic policies and monetary policies and other policies that they want to pursue.

Whereas our system has come to depend on the US dollar as a source of cheap financing without any limits and without any constraints on our ability to create credit, create money, pay the bills, however much, in any quantity at any time. So when you ask me about systemic risks, what I would say is that systemic risks are coming from outside this framework and are not yet fully understood inside the framework.

Which is why, for example, the dollar is on a tier relative to other currencies. And the phrase that’s used to describe it is it’s the least dirty shirt? What is not being said in that statement is how dirty is the least dirty shirt? Has it been already worn for ten days and all the other ones for 20 days, or is it just been worn for ten minutes? That’s my point. So how healthy is the healthiest course in the soap factory? That’s the question, right?

TN: And I guess the question about systemic risk, which is almost unanswerable. But when these things break, do they usually break gradually or do they usually break all at once? Is that an answerable question?

SM: Well, they break gradually and then all at once. Just like the famous also overused quote from Hemingway how do you go broke slowly and then all at once? Obviously you can think of this phenomenon as a confidence collapse. Now, confidence collapse is not a problem in itself. It’s a consequence of other problems where the preponderance of the evidence and preponderance of the mental recognition reaches a certain critical mass, where in the physics it’s called phase transition. 

Like for example, boiling water, which looks the same whether it’s half boiling or almost boiling. And then suddenly you see the bubbles, you see the churn, and it almost happens in moments, but it didn’t happen in the moment. It’s been heating up for a while. So that’s how I would describe it. And

TN: this is all great, I guess, if we have a doomsday clock, are we like really close to midnight or are we kind of approaching midnight? And it’s something that will come at some point I know that’s kind of an ambiguous question, but does it feel to you like we’re really close to midnight or can we put it off for a little bit?

SM: Well, I would answer it this way. I think the proverbial train has left the station. The crisis is now underway. Okay? The crisis, geopolitical crisis, military crisis, supply chain crisis, economic crisis, and financial crisis. All of the… And political crisis. You’re going to talk about elections. So all of these events, and by crisis I mean a moment of high danger, again develops similarly to boiling water. Crisis itself, once it starts, it means the heat is now in real time, is going up. The boiling point has not yet been reached. How long does it take to reach it? It depends on the intensity of the flame. Right. So that we cannot gauge. But what we can gauge is that the process has started and it can accelerate or decelerate as it goes, but I don’t think it can stop suddenly.

TN: Right. And a US president using the word Armageddon in a fundraising speech half a dozen times this week doesn’t really help lower the boiling point.

SM: It does not help lower the boiling point. It does not help. And frankly, I think that people are not paying much attention to what happened with this Nordstream explosion. But this is the first act of sabotage on an international against an international supply chain infrastructure, which I think is going to have dramatic consequences ultimately, because it changes the rules of the game. Sure something unthinkable becomes feasible.

Albert Marko: Just real quick. I agree with Simon on the systemic risks. And the fact is the Fed policies have completely ignored geopolitical issues, political issues, supply chain problems. I mean, they keep going on this tear about raising rates is going to bring down inflation, but then they put themselves in doom loop because the demand is going to come back faster than the supply damage that they’re creating. 

So, yeah, Simon is correct that the systemic risks are there and getting worse and that’ll see any chance that they can be alleviated in the next six months. I’m skeptical that ongoing rate rises or rapid rate rises is going to have an impact on inflation given… Wait till they end QT in the next couple of months and continue on with rate hikes thinking that’s going to fix things. It’s not. It’s not. It’s whistling past the graveyard. It’s way overused. But that’s what we’re doing.

TN: So before we move on to other things, I want to ask you about gold. Okay, Tracy, kindly put out some questions for you last night. And we got some responses from some Twitter users and this Twitter user @Spudlink1, asked, “if gold doesn’t rally in this environment, how could conditions possibly get more perfect than the last three years? Is gold dead?”

So, very poignant question, but what are your thoughts on that?

SM: So my thoughts on that are very simple. Gold itself. Gold is not a company. It doesn’t release results. It’s not like things are going better or worse. Gold is the same gold. So the price of gold and the prospects of gold are not determined by gold itself or anything that it does, but it is determined by supplying demand, which is human driven. So it’s human perception and human behavior. 

So why is gold not behaving like certain people like this gentleman expect it should? That’s because what this gentleman thinks and what few of us think is not accepted as received wisdom by the vast majority of investors. That’s not consensus. 

So the fact that these are perfect conditions for gold is absolutely not consensus because by the rules of the billiard table inside the billiard room, gold is not seen at the moment as a safe haven. The dollar is because the dollar is fiat gold. Now, fiat of gold is no gold. But inside this framework that we’ve been in for 40 years, it has been and so demand for gold, you don’t need to take my word for it. I mean, you can just look at the ETF flows like GLD publishes ETF laws and you can see that money is not flowing into gold. 

So demand from investors for gold is anemic in an environment where some of us think it should be robust. But that’s because we see certain things and we believe that there’s tremendous systemic risk and market large does not believe it. 

Again, you don’t need to take this as the only example. You can look at the Treasuries, they’re trading, I mean for something percent with the percent inflation. Well, why is that? Well, because the breakeven rate, which is market expectation of future inflation, the curve, the forward curve shows that rates are actually positive and getting more positive because inflation is supposed to drop to 2-3% imminently. Well, is it going to? Well, that’s conventional wisdom is that it will. So that’s one thing. 

The other thing I would say is when people say that gold is dead, I mean, it’s an American century theory because gold is essentially a reserve currency. It has outperformed all other currencies, reserve currencies but gold. So let’s say in dollar terms gold is down like 6% year to date, but in yen terms it’s up 18%. In pound terms it’s up 13%. In Europe, in Swiss Franc, all of the DXY components, currencies, DXY, Canadian dollar in all of those currencies, gold is up.

So gold is outperforming financial assets, stocks, equity is down 23%, Nasdaq is down whatever it is, 33% or 34% here today. Gold is down 6%. So it’s outperforming financial assets and an underperforming US dollar because US dollar is gold by the rules of the billiard table and the guest line has already blew up, but maybe the plane has not yet hit the room. 

And so as long as that’s continuing, everybody’s playing by those rules where there’s no credit risk in the dollar. So if there’s no credit risk in the dollar or in Treasuries, in US sovereign obligations, then by the dent of that reasoning, getting any kind of coupon beast getting no coupon, if you factor out credit risk and market is not factoring in credit risk, I think the credit risk is tremendous. And obviously people who are asking and wondering how come gold is not surging, they think there’s credit risk. But that’s a minority opinion. That’s a simple answer to that question. 

TN: And that is fantastic. Thank you so much for that. This is an amazing perspective because I think there is a lot of cynicism around gold in the markets today around kind of popular chatter. And it’s so great to get this perspective. 

AM: Tony, I mean, I’ve been a big critic of gold for a long time. However, in this scenario, I even have to admit that if you want to arbitrage for dollars, especially in other currencies and FX’s, gold is the only real way to do it. And the longer that the Fed makes errors in policy, there’s no question that people are going to start resorting to gold just as a hedge.

SM: My only warning to people is gold is a commodity that’s sort of it’s an industrial commodity in physical form. So, of course, all the paper gold exposure has counterparty risk. Physical gold does not have counterparty risk, but physical gold is a manufactured product. And manufactured product borrows coins. 

By the way, the premiums on coins are surging, and it’s doubled this summer since the beginning of the summer. So manufactured products, they’re supply chains, they’re manufacturing facilities that produce them. They can work 24 hours a day, but three ships, but they can’t work faster than that. 

So just like with toilet paper, it all works until suddenly there’s a surge in demand. Then there’s no toilet paper in your supermarket. It’s the same thing with gold. It’s available until everybody wants it, at which time, by definition, it’s not available because the inventory and supply chain is geared towards test demand, not towards surging demand. So as soon as demand surges, it disappears. 

So you buy insurance when you can, not when you think you really need it, because you’re not the smartest guy or person you know, other people achieve the same reach the same conclusion at the same time. And so everybody wants insurance at the same time.

TN: You’re the only guy I’ve ever heard who compared gold to toilet paper in a positive way. Yeah. Okay, let’s move on to crude from one physical quantity to another. Tracy, we talked about OPEC in recent weeks. We talked about crude prices in recent weeks. 

And with the OPEC announcement, the supply cut announcement this week, I want to revisit our discussion from a couple of weeks ago about crude prices in Q4. We talked about the possibility of a whipsaw effect for crude prices in Q4. What’s your thoughts on that? Do we see that happening?

Tracy Shuchart: Well, I think what we’re… First, I kind of wanted to touch on this 2 million barrels because it’s not actually a 2 million barrel cut, right? Because the group hasn’t been producing a quota all year, basically. So we’re running at a 3.58 million barrel shortfall, really, which happened in September. And so if we take a look at the cut distribution, yes, the five countries that are producing at or near quote, which are Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Russia, yes, they are shouldering most of that burden. But when you net everything out, it’s really closer to like 1.25 million barrels. So I just kind of wanted to clear that up because it’s really not 2 million.

Going into Q 4, what we have to pay attention to is, one, the ending of the SPR, which if they keep releasing it, eventually it will drain. But so far it should end in November, which is going to immediately take four to 7 million barrels off the market because that’s kind of what they’ve been releasing per week on average. Then we also have to look at China and their COVID lockdowns trying to come to an end because they’re looking for 5.5% GDP by end of year, which is not going to happen.

TN: Well, it’ll happen. 

TS: Well, on paper it’ll happen. Statistically it’ll happen. But we are starting to see a little bit of firmness in mobility data in traffic and airlines. What I’m also looking at is they are talking about lifting export quotas. If they do that, that means they are going to have to purchase more crude barrels because it would be a significant increase. Those are kind of the things that I’m.. Going into Q4, in other words, I think the pressure is definitely to the upside rather than the downside, just looking at what is coming online potentially that could propel this market higher as far as… I mean, we’re already in a structural supply deficit, so it’s not going to take a lot for this kind of freak out. 

TN: Post US midterms, post CCP meeting, post SPR, post other stuff. Right.

TS: And then December 5, we have to see if EU actually follow through with their oil and product embargo for Russia. So also another thing that would take more barrels off the market.

TN: Right. So I’ve also heard, I think you may have said it where this OPEC meeting, and what we’ve seen over the past few months is really OPEC changing their orientation to Asia and really forgetting about the west. Is that real? Are you seeing that, in fact, or is that just kind of a myth?

TS: Well, no, I mean, if you look throughout the last few years, I mean, China and Russia basically compete, sorry, Russia and Saudi Arabia basically compete for China’s fitness. So off and on, one of those countries has been their biggest suppliers. So this is not new where the focus is towards Asia, especially because over the last few years, the west is pursuing green policies and trying to stay away from that. And so where they can sell barrels like you see Saudi Arabia or you see OPEC in general raising their OSP to Asia consistently, right. Because they can capture above markets for their barrels. That’s not really a new phenomenon.

TN: Well, China’s perpetuating green policies, too, right. Kind of wink wink, supposedly as they build out coal plants and other things. But I think what I find interesting is Europe and the US are kind of begging for more energy and OPEC is saying, no, we’re going to cut back. I think the headline is more important than the fact the 2 million is more important than the 1.25, because that’s what really moved markets in the immediate term. But China had really bought all their crude already by, say, April or something, right? And so they had fixed all that stuff, the prices for the year in kind of second quarter. So this doesn’t at least for now, it doesn’t really affect them. It won’t affect them until early next year or something like that. Is that fair to say?

TS: Well, unless in Q4 they raise these export quotas, then it’s going to matter because that’s still on the table for discussion next year. This is kind of a last-minute thing. And so that’s definitely something that I’m watching if they actually follow through with that. Right?

TN: And also with purchases in a dollar equivalent, whether it’s not US dollar, whether or not it’s US dollar, these are extraordinarily expensive barrels compared to what they could have gotten in Q2. So something has to change for them to want to buy the volumes that they bought. And then if they’re buying at the same time the US is trying to refill the SPR, that creates even more pressure on the market. Is that fair to say?

TS: Yeah, absolutely. In fact, our SPR barrels are going to China, right? Right.

TN: So, Tracy, what are we missing? I mean, we’ve heard all this chat about OPEC over the last couple of days. What’s the nugget that you feel like people are missing?

TS: I think as prices have come down, I think everybody has been forgetting we are still in a structural supply deficit. Even though prices were coming down, they were down to extraneous reasons like recession fears and not as many Russian barrels off the market as initially anticipated. But really, the market structure hasn’t changed, nor has the supply problem. Right. Let me add another question there. I want to ask about refining capacity. What are we at now with refining capacity? We need more refining capacity. 90 something. We’re currently we’ve been between 90 and 95% of our refining capacity, which is crazy because I’m actually surprised that we haven’t seen more heart breakdowns. They’re not built to Google at 95%.

TN: So we have a hurricane goes through Louisiana, cuts out some refineries for a week. What does that do?

TS: Well, that would be a little bit of a relief for crude prices, right? Because you shake it with the barrels. But that’s going to take your product prices through the roof, and your current tax rates are going to go through the roof.

TN: And what’s the lag on that? What’s the tail on that?

TS: That really depends on how long the refinery is offline for. Right. Whether it’s a week or two, that’s fine. But if we start going into, like Katrina, where you’re going in months, then that’s going to be longer. Problem.

TN: Okay, very good. Thank you for that. And as we talk about gasoline, it becomes very political at some point. And Albert, as we go into we’re deep into the midterm season right now, and I’ve got a couple of graphics from Real Clear Politics looking at the House and the Senate races in the US.

And it looks like it’s very competitive in the Senate. The House, it seems like Republicans are doing very well to reclaim the House, but it seems like the Senate is really competitive at the moment. Can you walk us through that?

AM: Yeah, well, simply, the Republicans will easily take the majority. Redistricting alone will give them 20 seats, which is the majority, and then you start looking at any Democrat that one with 2% or less across the country is probably going to lose. So I think that will probably end up getting 250 seats in the House of the GOP. So I think that would end up being like 185 for the Democrats, which is important because you need a buffer to avoid any messy infighting the Senate becomes difficult because the Republicans have kind of weak candidates in Oz, in Pennsylvania, and Walker in Georgia.

If those two candidates were stronger, it would have been a slam dunk, but it’s not at the moment. Nevada looks like it’s trending towards the GOP, which is a big, big problem for the Democrats at the moment. If they lose Nevada, they’ll probably end up losing Arizona. And if they lose Arizona, it’s going to be a one or two seat GOP majority.

TN: Okay, and so what does that do? Okay. We covered Pennsylvania, right? You said it’s potential

Republican but not strong. Georgia potential, but not strong. Arizona is leaning that way. Nevada is leaning that way. Wisconsin is Wisconsin.

AM: Wisconsin and North Carolina are solid Republican.

TN: Okay, so then what does that mean for the second half of the Biden administration?

AM: Not good things. Hearings all over the place, from Hunter Biden’s antics to Biden’s pipeline policies, environmental policies that’s affecting the economy at the moment. Border crime, elections, election integrity, I mean, you name it, it’s going to be all over the news. So it’s just not good for the Biden administration. I expect them to keep on going with executive orders because there won’t be anything that he can pass.

TN: Okay, very interesting. Now for the people not in the US. Most Americans view legislative gridlock as a good thing, right? I mean, it’s a good thing for business when we have legislative gridlock. So this is not necessarily a bad thing for US government. There will be a lot of talk about can’t pass a budget, can’t get extensions on certain things, and that’s just drama that comes every year. But legislative gridlock is not necessarily a bad thing for American business. Is that fair to say?

AM: It’s not. You’re absolutely correct about that. However, actually, with Biden insisting on producing executive orders for his own policies and the treasury, with the Allen just acting insane, in my opinion, god knows what they’re going to sit there and pass. If you can’t pass something legislatively, they’ll do it via budgets. That’s fine. But it sets a terrible pressing going. Forward because we’re well past that, Tony. We’re well past that president. We’re well past that.

TN: Okay, great. I want to cover this over the next couple of weeks as we lead up to the election. So I just want to give people a taste of what we can talk about. So if we don’t mind if you guys don’t mind, let’s just go around and I’d love to know what you guys are looking for in the week ahead. Tracy, do you want to get us started? Then Simon will go to you. And now what are you guys looking for for the week ahead?

TS: Obviously, I’m watching the energy markets right as we get closer and to see what sort of policies the US is going to or the current administration is going to try to pull out of a hat to derail oil prices in front of Midterms. They’ve been talking about fuel bans, fuel export bans. They’re talking about actually trying to pass the no peck bill again. They’re also talking about actually seizing assets of Saudi Arabia, which they do own, motivo, which is the largest refinery in the US. Which is paramount to all out oil war. So closely watching the administration and how they’re going to move forward with energy policy.

TN: is this Venezuela thing real? Will they dial back the restrictions on Venezuela to get Venezuelan crude?

TS: Venezuela produces 7000 barrels per day and literally most of that goes to China to pay debts. There’s nothing more you can squeeze out of Venezuela.

TN: Okay, that’s good to know. So that’s fake news. All right. Okay. Simon, what do you see

going into the week?

SM: Well, a week is not my reference, in my opinion, but I think that the most important thing people should be watching are international geopolitical developments because I believe we are in a world war. It sounds very dramatic. War usually is assumed to be bomb flying, but there are other forms of enforcing essentially will on other people and economic, financial, political, ideological, cyberspace,

space, outer space these days. 

So I think the most critical thing to watch are developments like with Tracy’s talking about confiscation of Saudi refinery. I mean, that’s an act of war. That’s an act of economic war. So this is where I think a lot is going to come from. And the other thing I would watch very carefully for the types of developments like what we saw with Gilts in UK just overnight, things happen. Like for example, the repo lines right now are in excess of 2 trillion. I mean, in 2019, the first blow up, they went in with 30 billion. So this is a crisis that’s continuing and it’s being bailed out by the Fed.

So I would watch all these excess, telltales of all these excesses and watch for ripples on the surface to make sure to identify if something is really breaking. Like you said, when is it going to come? Well, is the water starting to boil? That’s what I want…

TN: Real quickly, do you get the sense that at least in the US, they’re trying to hold this back until midterms and then we’ll start to see a bunch of bad news come?

SM: Well, for example, they’re releasing strategic petroleum reserve, which is clearly controlling an attempt to control energy prices at the pump, gas prices at the pump. So, yes, I think after the elections we’re going to see some damage break.

TN: Yeah, interesting. Albert, week ahead, what do you got. Your eyes on? 

AM: CPI. And I think it’s going to end up coming in hot and all of a sudden you’ll see the dollar surge once again, maybe threatening 120. Then you talk about what Simon is saying about things breaking and building up of a narrative of ending QT, although we haven’t really started it, but it is what it is.

TN: Well, exciting times guys. Thank you so much. Thanks for your time. Thank you very much for all your insights. And have a great weekend. Thank you very much.

Learn more about CI Futures here: https://completeintel.com/futures

In this episode, we talked about what’s happening with inflation in markets, and where it’s hitting, particularly in the US in different sectors. Mike walked us through the Asian contagion for inflation. Also, given where USDCNY has been over the past week or so, how vulnerable is China? Are they more concerned about inflation or export competitiveness?

Sam put out a couple of wonderful newsletters about central bank responses to inflation last week. The Fed seems – and is – unrelenting in their response, regardless of what happens with UK gilts. One area Sam raised last week is the car market versus mid-market dining: Cars vs Cracker Barrel. He walked us through the price and volume considerations with these two.

And then we looked at Meta’s move to freeze hiring and their warning about layoffs. Is that a broader signal for tech?

Key themes:
1. Inflation: Asian Contagion
2. US Inflation: Cars vs Cracker Barrel
3. Meta’s move: More to come?
4. The Week Ahead

This is the 36th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:
Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Mike: https://twitter.com/UrbanKaoboy
Sam: https://twitter.com/SamuelRines

Time Stamp
0:00 Start
0:49 Themes for this Week Ahead
2:47 How vulnerable is China? Are they more concerned about inflation/export?
10:23 China will not be the exporter of deflation anymore
13:28 Will China give in to devaluing CNY?
16:15 Cars VS mid-market dining
22:00 Price increases will continue?
24:26 Is this the beginning of the end of tech wage spike?
29:11 How does this current ad slowdown compare to the past?
30:20 What’s for the week ahead?

Listen to the podcast version on Spotify here:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5HrIhlEwZMwIBDdFwBo5Ib

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5HrIhlEwZMwIBDdFwBo5Ib

#inflation #asiainflation #usinflation #stockmarket #stockmarketnews #economy #economics #inflationrate #costofliving #effectsofinflation #comparingpricesinflation #metalayoffs #meta #layoffs2022 #investing #inflationinasiaandtheus

Transcript

Tony Nash: Hi, everybody. This is Tony Nash and welcome to The Week Ahead. Today we have a couple of very special guests. We’ve got Michael Kao. You would know him from Twitter as UrbanKaoboy. And we’ve got Sam Rines. And obviously you know Sam from previous shows. This week we’re going to talk about a lot about what’s happening with inflation in markets. We’re going to talk a lot about where inflation is hitting, particularly in the US in different sectors. And then we’re going to cover a little bit of tech.

So our key themes this week first is the Asian and contagion for inflation. And Mike’s going to jump into that in quite a bit of detail. We’re then going to look at US inflation. Sam put out a really interesting note covering kind of cars versus Cracker Barrel, although that’s not really the comparison, but it’s something in that range. And then we’re going to look at Meta’s move to freeze hiring and their warning about layoffs. Is that a broader signal for tech? And finally we’ll move into the week ahead.

So before we jump into this, please be aware that we have our product called CI Futures, where we forecast hundreds of commodities, currencies and equity indices as well as economic indicators. I was just going over our error for GDP USD for the month of September, and our area was about 2.23%, I think, for the month. So it’s a very relevant product even in these times. You can find out more on the link below. 

It’s $99 a month and you can see everything in the subscription there. We publish our error rates. We publish our forecast. You can download the data, you can download the charts and do comparisons. So please check that out. 

Michael, thanks for joining us. I really appreciate your time. I’ve heard you on a number of other podcasts and it’s just so great to have you here. I really appreciate it.

Michael Kao: Yeah, thank you. Great to meet both of you. Yeah, I appreciate you having me.

TN: Fantastic. Hey, there’s a tweet that you put out a couple of weeks or about a month ago actually looking at the Asian contagion and pretty much it was reflecting a tweet that you had put out in January, talking about your expectations for the year ahead and the set up for the year ahead.

So given where, say, CNY has been over the past week or so and the set up that you put out earlier in the week, how vulnerable is China? Are they more concerned right now about inflation? Are they more concerned about export competitiveness? What does that look like? And as you start talking, we’ll put up a chart of USDCNY as well.

MK: Sure. Before I answer that question, I just want to take a quick step and just outline for you, like where I kind of arrived at this Asian contagion thesis. Right? So about a year and a half ago, I’ve been invested in the oil patch for quite a while. And I’ve expressed my bet through a long term private equity plate because it’s my belief that years and years of underspend and then exacerbated by this worldwide ESG push right, and diversion of capital away from the sector and then of course, further exacerbated by all of this massive monetary and fiscal stimulus first created oil inflation way back. Right.

So I started noticing this basically around the beginning of ’21 and I wrote a bunch of threads about it. And then during the year I started thinking what are the ramifications of this? Well, the ramifications are that it’s going to make our Fed more hawkish than the rest of the world earlier than the rest of the world. And so what are the ramifications of that? Well, given that currencies are mainly driven by interest rate differentials that would in turn create this what I labeled a USD wrecking ball effect.

And so as that thesis started kind of coming true and gathering steam throughout the year, the tweet that you referenced that I wrote at the beginning of this year was that I said, look, the setup is a scary one for this year because we have the makings of a stagflationary energy crisis not seen since the 70s. It’s going to create tightening ahead of the world, creating this USD wrecking ball. And then we have this everything bubble to boot on top of that. 

And this wrecking ball really reminded me of my sort of baptism by fire into the hedge fund business. In 1997, I joined a hedge fund here in LA called Canyon and we were value credit based investors and a lot of our idiosyncratic bets essentially got swamped by the macro, right? So what started as seemingly innocuous devaluations by a couple of EM countries in Southeast Asia metastasized over the course of a year and a half until full blown credit contagion. Except this time, what I wrote about in this thread is that what’s scary is that number one, the level of inflation that’s driving this US dollar racking ball is much higher than before.

And from my oil centric point of view, I think a lot of it is structural. And then the second thing is that the vulnerability point… I mean the EM countries are also vulnerable. But what’s scary this time around are the developed nation currencies like the Euro, the Japanese yen.

And now I come back to your question, the Chinese Yuan. Your question is a really interesting one that I actually tweeted about this week is China. China is in a box. Just like the Bank of Japan, just like the ECB. They’re all in a box because their respective economies are much weaker than ours.

I think the big question, and I don’t know when the US dollar wrecking ball is going to peak, maybe it already has. But I suspect though, my hunch is that maybe it’s still got some legs to go because until you reach a point where the macro fundamentals of those respective economic zones are strong enough to allow their central banks to essentially outhawk our central bank. Any interventions are going to basically be just a wasted burn of their reserves.

And so you saw that with the BOJ, right? They spent something like 20 billion of reserves defending their currency and that lasted two days. And we’re back to all time lows in the Yen.

So China is really interesting because China is such an export-driven economy. One would think that with their economy on the back foot from the property crisis, from zero COVID policy, one would think that as their neighbors are devaluing and becoming more competitive versus them, that they would be more worried about their current account getting hit, right, their current account surplus getting hit. And so you would think that they would want to let their Renminbi devalue.

What we saw instead, I think, was that yesterday that the PBOC had a pretty strong intervention in CNY. That tells me, I actually put a tweet out to exactly the effect that’s a big tell to me that they’re more concerned about inflation. And China, just like Japan, is uniquely vulnerable in that they are also net importers of something like 80% of their energy. They’re in a tough bind.

And the million dollar question is no one knows when… That day, when the BoE intervened and all risk assets rallied hard. I think that was the market kind of conflating that all these interventions are going to be exactly. It’s going to lead to the Fed also going to QE. And I put out another thought on Twitter saying that, you know what, I don’t know that you can conflate that because the Fed was happy to be the world’s plunge protection team in a world of where there was no structural inflation.

When you’ve got a world of structural inflation, it becomes kind of an every man from self dynamic where I don’t know that how much we can go help stymie the yen or stymie the Renminbi or stymie the Euros collapse by queuing here. Because that’ll just completely inflame inflation. And the big tell on that was on that risk on day. You know, what was really roofing also was oil. And so it comes back down to oil.

If the Fed actually blinks and goes back and pivots, the thing that’s going to moon and lead us right back to square one is oil, which is what started this whole cycle in the first place.

TN: So let me take a step back from what you said, because you just unloaded a lot, which is great, and I think Sam will violently agree with you on a lot of stuff. But what’s really interesting to me. If China is worried about inflation. Although this is somewhat like 2011. When they had the, or 2007 or whatever. When they had the pig flu and all this other stuff.

And there was inflation pressures but China has been the source of deflation for the last 25 or 30 years right and so if China is no longer the global exporter of deflation then it is a dramatic change in the structure of the global economy. Dramatic and I think so many people use this that this is not something that we’re not going back to 2019 prices ever. Right? But I don’t really hear people talking about China not being able to be the exporter of deflation anymore and that’s just one that’s come and gone that’s already gone right. 

MK: And it’s not just China. It’s Eastern Europe, too, right, because I wrote a thread that basically borrowed some of the thoughts from Professor Goodheart’s paper about how this was kind of a once in a lifetime demographic dividend that allowed the world and the Fed to basically pay for over every financial crisis of the last four decades with aggressive monetary policy because there were never any inflationary repercussions. But as you so validly pointed out, that was due to like a once in a lifetime sort of demographic dividend that is now in secular reversal.

Sam Rines: To this point… I want to jump in and just reinforce this point here because I think it’s a really good one that China was a massive source of goods deflation globally along with East Germany, Poland. Etc. as they joined in following fall of the Berlin Wall. 

But I think  there’s something really intriguing here is that it doesn’t even matter if they still continue to export some goods deflation over time. Their commodity inflation tailwind is going to be problematic. The only thing that has really saved them with a Renminbi north of seven is that they haven’t had to import anywhere near the amount of commodities that they would typically have to. If you’re locked down, they have the longest commute times on average in the world in China. That is a tremendous tailwind to gasoline. Food. Et cetera. When you begin to reopen and have China’s economy going full bore, that is a tremendous issue for the commodity complex in general in an environment where it’s already broken. It’s going to be a tremendous amount of pressure on that system and I don’t think people are prepared for that either. That China is now the exporter of an incredible amount of commodity inflation over the next half decade or so.

MK: It’s actually really insightful because commodities which they have to import. They’re super afraid of that and that oil is basically the primary factor of production for everything under under the sun. Yes, everything.

TN: Back to CNY do you think they’ll kind of give in to devaluing or do you think they will continue to fight this, which is a battle that everyone loses eventually?

MK: That’s such a hard question to answer because if anybody can fight it, it would be China right?Because they have a non convertible currency, right. So I think, for instance, Japan is much more vulnerable because I don’t see Japan imposing capital controls and I don’t see Japan relaxing on their yield curve control. So the only exit valve there is the Yen devaluation. Right.

But in China’s case, they have capital controls. I spoke on an interview earlier this week with Mike Nicoletos, and we were discussing about whether or not there’s a porosity through the Hong Kong dollar. Right. I think they have to clamp back down, too, right? Because. If they really want to manage the pegs, they need to really like stymie capital controls. Otherwise, I think capital just going to flow out.

TN: So will we see a divergence between CNY and CNH? 

MK: What is the divergence? I mean, it’s tiny. Two or something. 

TN: Okay, great. I’m just wondering if CNH is trading offshore and that’s allowed to freely trade or relatively freely trade? Maybe. Sam, you have a better idea? I’m not entirely clear on what the restrictions are on CNH trading because I don’t think it’s completely for all. Otherwise that divergence would be much bigger, I think.

TN: Well, it’s a spread, right? It’s a proxy of a spread. And so you can see pressure on that, and you can see that pressure pushing the expectation of seeing why potentially devaluing if they don’t handle it. Like PBOC, they’ve got a lot of smart people, but policy wise, they make a lot of mistakes. Don’t think they’ll elegantly.

MK: I was just going to say that I actually think that if they let CNY or CNH freely float, it would have a nine handle on it. At least, I think that’s where it goes.

TN: Yeah, at least. Okay, very good. Thanks for that, Mike. I really appreciate that. Let’s move on to Sam. You put a note out earlier this week talking about inflation and central bank responses to inflation. And the Fed obviously seems unrelenting in their responses. Mike mentioned, as you mentioned in your newsletter and here several times, but one area you raised in your newsletter this week is kind of cars versus mid market dining.

So you talk about cars, Carvana versus Cracker Barrel. Can you kind of walk us through that? And I’ve got a couple of shots from your newsletter. One is on the Carvana release, and the other one is on Cracker Barrel. Actually, we only have the one on Cracker Barrel to show the group. But do you mind walking us through that?

SR: Sure. So the impetus behind the note was really to kind of make the point that Mike made earlier, that the Federal Reserve does not care about what’s going on in the Gills market. It is not going to come save the Bank of England and Downing Street from what they’ve done. That’s not their problem. That’s a domestic issue. And when you decide to have a massive fiscal tailwind and a monetary policy that was being highly restrictive and going to sell bonds, your currency is going to fall. And that’s your own problem. That’s the way that the Fed viewed it. And then a bunch of Fed speakers came out and said basically exactly that, but in a little kinder tone.

But the idea there kind of pulling that together is that the US domestic economy is still doing well. So the CarMax report was really interesting because CarMax has used autos, right? That’s what they sell. And all the headlines about inflation and used autos, their volumes got absolutely trashed in the past quarter. And that makes sense, right? People?

There’s a drawback from interest rates moving higher. It’s one of the most direct things that is affected housing and car financing. But the interesting part about it was while the volumes were down, they still had revenues up on their retail segment because prices were higher 25% year over year, their average selling price. So they did a really good job of kind of managing their revenues.

But that speaks to the inflation problem, right? The Fed doesn’t care about volumes going down. If the prices are still higher. Then you kind of go to Cracker Barrel, right? Middle America in my mind is you can encapsulate middle America in a Cracker Barrel I mean, it’s kind of perfect. And when you look at their release, it’s pretty clear that they called out 65 and over dining down. Guess what? That’s highly sensitive to inflation. They cited lower income individuals dining out less. Again, highly sensitive to inflation. And they still had their comp store sales up 6%, which is pretty good. And then you read a little further in the same sentence and they’re like, and we had pricing higher by 7%, so traffic was down. So they had negative traffic at higher prices. So that is again, they’re giving up volumes to be able to push the price and grow reps.

I think this is kind of a microcosm of the US economy, right? It is a strong economy. If you can continue to push price like that on the consumers. If you can grow revenues while pushing price at those levels, that’s pretty incredible. And then it’s pretty interesting to me because there’s this whole idea that corporate America is going to slow down their price increases. Cracker Barrel basically shot that idea right in the foot by saying, hey, listen, we think wages are going to inflate 5% over the next year. That’s september to September. And then if we’re going to have comparable store sales up, right?

So guess what? They’re going to continue to push price. And that’s where I think we kind of need to take a step back and realize these inflation pressures are broadening out and they are beginning to become embedded. Their food costs, when they forecast that, I believe that number was 8%. These are significant figures, right? These are not things that we would have thought were possible five or six years ago. They’re becoming embedded. I mean, that’s 2023 that these guys are thinking that.

And just one more point going back to the CarMax report, their SG and A, their cost of doing business, we’re up 16% year over year because they hired more people and they paid them more. So you think about you grow revenues at 3%, but your costs are up 16%. I mean, that’s a pretty big problem. Again, it goes back to the two things that the Fed really wants to get under control, including inflation is two things, right? They talk about the vacancies to unemployment ratio. They need less hiring to happen and they need wages to begin wage growth, to begin to subside a little bit because that’s a tailwind consumption.

So I think you’re having a number of pieces working against the Fed that might not be showing up in the data, mostly because I think the data is kind of crap. But the best part is if you’re kind of willing to go to that microlevel  to get the macro and pull the macro out of it, these trends are not going anywhere anytime soon.

TN: So what I get out of that is I hope Cracker Barrel has digital menus. If not, I want to be their menu printer because every time I go into a restaurant, I wonder how often they change their prices, right? And basically, from what you’re saying, it sounds like they’re going to continue to push up, I don’t know, quarterly, semi annually, but they’re going to continue to push these prices up based on what’s happening in the market, and I suspect they’re not going to come back down. Oh, no.

SR: There are other ways to do it, right. You can push price by pushing less food on a plate, too. Right. So you can do some creative things on multiple fronts. Shrinkflation. The shrinkflation. But I do think that you’re not going back to anything like 2019. Right?

MK: I just want to riff off that for just a second because I participated in a real estate panel a couple of weeks ago and listening to these asset managers from around the world present. One big asset manager was basically saying that they’re still seeing essentially. Even though the rent growth is slowing down. It’s still growing for Q3 of this year where you would think that the hiking has already kind of worked its way into the system. That rent growth is still annualizing at a 10% click. So you talk about sticky.

I’ve had this thesis that it started with commodity inflation. Commodities have abated somewhat and certainly will abate more if there is an Asian contagion. Right. But the core stuff, which is what Sam is talking about, and also rents, that’s really sticky. But here’s the problem. When that stuff starts curling over, I really agree with you that if China reopens, you’re going to see a resurgence in commodity stuff again. So I call this sort of like the core energy tag team. And I think we’re going to see this tag team effect possibly for years.

SR: Oh, yeah. To rip off that I called it the COVID earthquake is going to have more aftershocks than anybody really wants to admit. 

TN: Yes, there was so much intervention. You can’t just earn it out in six months, right. Or a year. It takes so long to work that out. So that makes a lot of sense. Guys, staying on this inflation theme and Sam, you mention SG and A and wages. Meta announced yesterday that they are imposing a hiring freeze and they’re warning their employees about restructuring. 

So obviously now that as of yesterday, they’re the second most valuable company in the world with Exxon taking over. But if Meta is instituting a hiring freeze and Sam, you talked about Carvana hiring a bunch of people last quarter and their costs going up, what does that signal for tech?

I think, Sam, you showed me the site layoffs.fyi or something like that to look at layoffs in tech, there are a couple of issues which we covered with Mike Green before and you’ve talked about up befor Sam, where ad space is becoming almost infinite and these guys who are ad based have a lot of headwinds and Meta is no different. And so that’s obviously one of their headwinds.

But the SG&A cost is huge. Right. What do we need to be looking for with Meta and companies like Meta? And is this the beginning of the end of the tech wage spike?

SR: I’ll take part of that. Okay, good. Is it the end of the tech wage hike? I don’t know that is going to be the case simply because we don’t have enough people with those skills, even if we do have a pullback in the number of hires. Right? On the marketing side, yes. But on the tech hiring front of people with programming skills, et cetera, I don’t think that’s going to slow down or those are going to slow down anytime soon, at least until we have enough of them.

But maybe on the marketing side, et cetera, I would say that the Meta announcement is far more indicative of a slowdown generally in Silicon Valley startup ad spending on the marketing. That’s a problem for Meta on the margin. A significant amount of their ad revenue comes from startups.

It’s a much larger problem for a company like Snapchat. Right. There is a hierarchy of where you go to advertise and when you’re going for eyeballs. So if it’s a problem for Meta, it’s probably a much larger problem for a Snap in some of those smaller, less ubiquitous platforms. 

But yeah, it’s always going to be a question of where is Meta putting its incremental dollars, because it is making a pretty big push into the Metaverse. It’s unlikely that people are getting slashed, jobs are getting slashed there. It’s more likely that what you’re going to see is a reduction in places. They’re simply not seeing the returns that they want to see and they’re going to continue to grow the hiring base on something that’s important to them, like building out the Metaverse side of the business.

TN: Sure. Yeah. Mike, what are you seeing with tech?

MK: I don’t follow Idiosyncratic tech as much, so yes and no. I’m actually, ironically, one of my Idiosyncratic positions is actually a dyspacked ad tech company that’s in the ad arbitrage business. That’s a different type of a different type of play, but I haven’t been as focused. So I’m very interested to hear your sort of microcosmic views. Really interesting.

TN: Yeah, I think everything Sam says is spot on. I do think that in terms of the core coding skills, there’s a lot of slack there. So for example, as we talk around, because we hire developers. Some of the developers who work for some of the very large tech companies who make mid six figures, something like that, their daily code commit is something like eight lines of code. That’s it. 

Okay, so these guys are not sweatboxing code. It’s a very minimal amount of code they have to put in every day. So I think there are major productivity gains to be made on the developer side within these large tech companies. So maybe it’s not hitting yet, but I think it will hit soon as it always starts with marketing, right? It always starts with traveling expenses and then it goes further. And so I think give it a few months and we can see it go further into development.

MK: I’m curious, Sam, if what you’re seeing in the sort of tech ad slow down, how does this compare to past downturns, past cycles?

SR: It’s hard to say because we haven’t seen many significant down cycles. Because COVID wasn’t a down cycle for ad spending. It was kind of strange. Right. Social media did very well during that time frame, and social media was so young in ’08, ’09 that it’s hard to really get a read there, except you can kind of extrapolate Google. Google did pretty well in ’08 ’09. They took a lot of market share from traditional media, but that was a different age. So I would say it’s pretty hard to look back and say it’s going to be similar this way or not similar.

MK: But wouldn’t you say, though, that the ad slowdown is just across the board? It’s not as if traditional ad spending is going to start eating their lunch across the board.

TN: Real quick before we wrap up, if you can, in ten to 15 seconds, what are you looking for for the week ahead? Mike, what are you looking for next week to watch?

MK: Well, this has been a very confusing week in that I think there have been a lot of quarter inch shenanigans and window dressing. I’m still macro pretty bearish. Okay. I’m concerned that I think after the window dressing is done, I think some of the supports from the market may actually not be there. I watch bonds and commodities a lot.

TN: That makes sense. Yes, Sam?

SR: I’m just watching the Euro and what happens with TTF next week. I think that’s really important after we get through the quarter close.

TN: Absolutely. Guys, thank you so much. I know this is quick. I wish we could talk for two more hours.

I guess we got cut off at the very end there, so I really apologize for that. I just wanted to thank Mike Kao and Sam Rines for coming on The Week Ahead. Thanks, guys, so much for all that you contributed this week. And thanks to everyone for watching. Have a great weekend.

Learn more about CI Futures here: https://completeintel.com/futures

S&P500 has fallen to 2680, down 23% from the ATH in January. How serious is the equity downtrend? Eric Barna (@doublewidecap on Twitter) talked us through this from the technical perspective. He says the market is in a longer-term downtrend and to expect some sharp rallies as we head lower. We may see new lows for the year and a test of 3300-3500 on the S&P. 

Also, we discussed the Fed’s view of a “better balance” in the labor force with Sam Rines, including a detailed discussion of the vacancies to unemployment ratio (V/U). 

Lastly, Tracy Shuchart shared more on how energy issues in Europe are pushing manufacturing out of the region toward North America.

Key themes:
1. How serious is the equity downtrend?
2. Fed: “Better balance” in labor markets
3. Energy intensive mfg exiting Europe
4. The Week Ahead

This is the 35th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:
Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Eric: https://twitter.com/DoubleWideCap
Sam: https://twitter.com/SamuelRines
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Time Stamp

0:00 Start
0:55 Key themes for this episode
1:46 How serious is the equity downtrend?
8:19 In what level are we done with the downtrend?
17:00 “Better balance” in labor markets
22:20 Is the Fed still in the demand destruction path?
26:15 Base effect to kick in because of inflation?
28:24 Energy intensive manufacturers exiting Europe
32:01 Where will the energy manufacturers in Europe go?
34:00 What’s for the week ahead?

Listen to the podcast version on Spotify here:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5wPqkhVmfVWfPz4YemRxCz?si=cc0ced4323524a70

Transcript

Tony Nash: Hi, and welcome to the week ahead. I’m Tony Nash. Today, our special guest is Eric Barna. You would know him as @DoubleWideCap on Twitter. We’ve also got Sam Rines and Tracy Shuchart today.

So we’re just joined by an amazing group this morning. As we wake up this morning, we see that the S&P has fallen kind of to 2680 or something like that. It’s down by 1.7%. It’s been that kind of weak. And we thought it would be really good to get Eric in to talk us through kind of how serious our situation is right now.

So in our key themes, the first one is how serious is the equity downtrend? And Eric’s going to walk us through that. We’re then going to look at the kind of the Fed’s view of a better balance in the labor force, and Sam has written a bit on that, and we’re going to talk through that. And then Tracy Is going to talk us through more of the energy issues in Europe and some issues around moving manufacturing, potentially moving manufacturing out of Europe in a way that will hit the most. So guys, thanks so much for joining us today.

Eric, welcome. I know you’re very Technical, and I’m hoping you can bring us into kind of quite a lot about what’s happening technically in markets right now. So really, how serious is the equity market downtrend How long will it last? What will that downtrend look like?

Eric Barna: Yeah, just to start it off. Coming into this year, if you follow me on Twitter for a while with really starting in the fall of 2021, maybe it takes me or it takes the market a little bit longer to realize it, but we were heading out of this just support. 2021 was ridiculous as far as the market goes, I Mean, it was just ridiculous. Pal started signaling this kind of over. We got to kind of adjust things back.

And so that’s when I started thinking, okay, this is going to be a different set of circumstances, but I was looking at just recent history of 2018, 2019 type of market through 22 and 23. And that’s great for people like me because it gives us good to find ranges.

It took a little bit longer than I Thought to really test down into the prepandemic Highs. The first real upshot from not the lows, not the lows at 2100, but the initial push over that precoded low and then the retracement. So there’s kind of a Level. And once you release this on Saturday, I’ll put the SDX levels I’m looking at es the futures, and I back adjust contracts. So everybody’s levels are going to look a little bit Different. But 31 65 to 35 44 is kind of the meat of that first push over the precoded highs, off the 2020 lows and then the retracement back in there.

And I’ve been waiting, waiting, waiting for that retracement to kind of finish off, but we put the highs in early this year and this will be the third leg down. So first leg down was January through March, and then we had our March high, then we sold off again to the June low. We came back up to the August high, and this is the third leg down. So I’m looking for me a dip down.

We’re getting close to that area, but it’s not quite there yet. And when I say by the dip, few people know that November 2020, I sold my house that I’ve had for 20 years. I banked the money and it’s been sitting, drawing ridiculously small interest waiting for this when I put the money in. And this retracement here would get us down into somewhere in the 3000 503,300 and that’ll give us a new low for the year. And we’re generally weak through the first week or so, through August or October.

And if it’s going to happen, you’re going to get a bounce there. But you got to remember, you can kind of look at 2018 and that October, December, a little bit of crash we had there. So it’s possible it goes slower, but I think there’ll be good bounces at, like I said, that level, that 35 44. And like I said Saturday I’ll put the SBX levels in the comment of that or the Prepan Democrat, which on my chart is 33 27, somewhere in that area, a good sustainable bounce.

But it’s just kind of like yesterday on a short term basis, people were all excited about trying to buy that 72, try to buy that dip, and there’s just nothing, there’s nothing to tell you that this is over. The downtrend is pick a timeframe and the downtrend is intact. So the easier trade is still to the downside.

You may get some tradable bounces in there, but for me it’s more be patient for that bounce and then sell it back down. And until that confirms right now my swing high is the August high. And there’s a great deal of volume in that area, the 4000, $104,200.

If buyers can break back over there, I’ll get bullish on the market again. But for now, of course, for me, being typically a day trader, I’ll trade each way, but in the market structure like that. So the same patterns on a monthly show, up on the weekly, show, up on the daily, show, up on the intraday.

But for me, my kind of bearing on my trade is the weekly. And the weekly tells me on bigger rift, you want a size and you want to short. If you are going to catch a technical bounce, you want to be small, you want to be out quick. So that’s just kind of how I use the weekly. But for now, the weekly is solid, trend down.

TN: Great. Sam, do you have a question?

Sam Rines: I’m just listening, just taking notes.

TN: It sounds to me that you think we’re going to bottom out, say around 3400, we’ll say in a general range, and then we’ll see things maybe up around 4100. And if they’re sustainably above 4100, then we’re kind of done with the downtrend. Is that fair?

EB: Yeah, yeah, that’s good. And we definitely don’t have enough time to go through all of it. But just keep following me on Twitter. I want to post a lot more on.

My two big key levels every trading day is where is the trailing week volume? What was the most traded week or price in the last five days and then the most traded price in the trailing month? The last 2022 days? Trailing trading week and trading month. And so right now the trailing week is 37 80. It was yesterday, 3890. So volume is coming down, volume is following price. And that’s what I’m always looking for is where is value for the last five days? And as price moves down, is that value moving down this price?

Because if you start losing that ability to put volume at the lows, you’re going to get that really good snapback route and you’re probably coming back up into the trailing week. And if you get over the trailing week, you look at your trailing month because that’s probably going to be the next target.

Right now. Trailing months, if you’re looking at most of September, last couple of weeks in August, is at mean the snapbacks that we can get out of this market are dramatic for me as a short term trader, but it doesn’t change my opinion that at some point I want to size back down. And so we’re just not over with it now. So heading into we’ll see what JPAL does here, I guess is speaking now, but that’ll be my line in the Sam for next week. Is that 37.80? I’ll be looking for shorts in that area to come back down on any kind of pullbacks because right now the market is dreadfully short.

If you look at breadth, if you look at the options market, we’re sitting at like a billion dollars in negative gamma. Right now. The VIX is high. 28. Short term VIX is 29. So there hasn’t been a reversion yet. And that’s kind of and if you were watching yesterday on Twitter in my feed when we started rallying yesterday, I was like, no, that’s not the dip to buy anything weight for a key level like previous low and short the heck at it because it’s coming back to 80 and that’s what it did.

But we’re inverted on the deck and we haven’t quite recovered from that. We haven’t reversed back to a normal looking VIX. Until that happens, any price lower the 2022 low right now is my key target. What would it take for us to get a normal looking VIX from your perspective? You’re going to have to start seeing as time happens, you start to cane those puts. You get people covering those puts and the dealers can get rid of the hedges that they have. And that puts it in a situation where I call it a dumbbed or mechanical bid, where it’s buy at any price. 

They don’t care about my levels. They don’t care where the trailing week and then the second part of that dumb money, the pension funds, the insurance companies who are trading more on risk and volatility, they have those volatility algos that run and again, those are dumb bits. So I look at realized volatility, where’s the three month realized volatility, where’s the one month volatility trailing volatility and who’s in control right now? It’s the short term volatility. It’s higher than the three months. And that gives you it’s great for me as a day trader because it’s going to give me good ranges introduced.

Once the three months realized volatility is higher than the one month, then the market kind of calms down. And so you start looking at big days in that trailing three months. And if those days fall off, so say back in June, we had some really good 3% down days and those days fall off. And if you’re not replacing them with big ball days to replace that volatility, the volatility will drop.

That will set those pension funds and those insurance funds to buy. And it’s just dumb bit. They don’t care if S&P is at 3700, 3800, 3900 they’re just playing volatility. Those are things that I look for for me to go, okay, you know what, I’m going to put a chunk of money long here. And when I say a chunk of money long is it’s usually a couple of weeks, a week. I don’t even know what the retirement fund is. Somebody else. Totally. And it’s that it’s not my game.

TN: Great. Tracy, do you have a question here? 

TS: No, I’m just listening to this.

TN: Eric, we’re not super technical. We don’t really talk technicals that much. I think we’ll start doing it a bit more. But this is great. So thanks for that and I think it’s all new for us and really glad to hear all of this. So thank you for this.

EB: Yeah, just follow for me, it’s follow the volume. What is volume doing? Where’s the most traded prices in area? If we’re coming back up, like I said, that 3780 is a big key level. Buyers take that over, you’re going to bring in that shortcoming. There’s going to be plenty of stops over yesterday’s high.

We’ll get you back probably into the mid 3800. And I followed on a weekly. If you look at the weekly now, the most traded price this week is below last week’s most traded price. What is the market telling you? It’s telling you it’s still in price discovery mode. We haven’t found balance. And I’m a dumb day trader.

TN: I think it’s great. Okay, perfect. Eric, thank you so much. Let’s move on to some Fed talk. I think that segues really nicely into what you’re talking about price discovery. And one thing that Sam has published a lot about Fed, he does regularly, but he pretty much masterfully nailed the Fed’s calls this week and the impact of the market.

Sam, do you want to talk us a little bit through that and a little bit about the labor markets, the better balance in labor markets that Chair Powell talked about in his discussion. We’ve got a chart up right now on what you call the switcher spiral. So job switchers and gains and vu. If you could explain I know we talked about it briefly before, but what is vu and how does that play into the better balance in labor markets?

SR: So much like Eric was saying, that the market hasn’t found a balance. Neither has the Fed. And I think that’s kind of critical to think about when we’re trying to process what the Fed might be doing, how they might be acting, et cetera. So vu is vacancies to the number of unemployed individuals, specifically job vacancies. And when, basically, economists and Fed officials were looking for a reason that they missed the embedding of inflation and the overshoot of inflation, they found that there was a pretty tight fit between an elevated number of job openings and too few unemployed individuals. And the reason that that is somewhat disconcerting for the Fed. Is pretty straightforward right now. 

If you switch jobs, you get paid a lot more than your old job, right? Those are really where the wage gains are. You’re north of 8% as a job switcher and there’s lots of job openings. So the potential for a wage price spiral there is significant. It’s not necessarily a theoretical at this point. It’s there that’s the disconcerting part. If you have a wage spiral, then you have a price spiral and then it gets really difficult to back away from it over time.

Can I just stop you right there and say is this view concerned the wage price spiral? Is that particularly in the US. Or is that global? That’s us. Well, I wouldn’t say it’s us only it’s a particular phenomenon in the US. And I think that’s really the only central bank that I would apply that framework to.

But Powell made it very clear not only did he state that job openings were too high, too unemployed, I mean, he called out view directly, but he mentioned better balance a number of times. Right? This is a Fed that is solely concentrated on inflation.

It does not care how much pain there is in the labor market until you begin to have a decline in the Vacancies to unemployed and until they see realized, not projected inflation come down. Do they factor in labor participation rate at all? I mean, it’s labor participation rate is lagging, right? So that would make sense that there are more job openings than there are job seekers. Does that factor into the equation at all? No, because the prime age is pretty much back to where it was precovid. It’s a bunch of old people and a bunch of young people that aren’t in the labor force.

And the Fed is going to completely ignore that. COVID did cause a number of older individuals to get out of the labor market. It was that simple, right? When you figure out that you don’t have much time left and you got some money, you retire. There was a bit of a mental shift there. So I wouldn’t say that that is a significant factor. And if you back out to a normal participation rate, you’re still sitting at about 1.6 to 1.7 jobs for unemployed job openings per unemployed.

So it doesn’t take the number down to the .9% to one ratio that the Fed would actually like to see. If you look at the numbers, you’re looking at a 6% plus percent unemployment rate to get the vacancy ratio back down. And so the Fed is willing to take some pain in the labor market. And I don’t think that people are really anticipating it. And I don’t think people are prepared for a Fed that really doesn’t care about your labor market and only cares about its inflation.

TN: They’ve already said they don’t care about your house, so now we’re learning they don’t care about your job.

TS: They don’t. Care about your job either. He basically said that, right?

SR: He said, yeah. His press conference, he stated it directly. And I made a joke that their forecasts were living in a unicorn metaverse about unemployment and inflation.

SR: I stick by that because you’re not going to have a four and a half percent unemployment rate. You’re going to have closer to five and a half to six and a half percent unemployment rate before you begin to see inflation break and have it break in a way that convinces the Fed it’s not transitory.

The Fed does not want to have a transitory breaking inflation. So I’ll bring back transitory and annoy everyone.

TN: If you dial it back in our discussions about six or nine months, we started talking about demand destruction. They’re still on this demand destruction path. Right. Because it’s still really kind of the impacts of supply side inflation, not necessarily demand driven. Right. Or is the demand driven really only in the US. Because we see so much supply side inflation in the rest of the world? 

SR: Yeah, it’s two sided in the US. Right. You still have significant demands in the US. Even with inflation running hot, and you have supply side constraints. So it’s a two sided problem in the US. And the Fed knows it can affect the supply side to a certain degree, not necessarily much.

What it can really smack is demand. And so until that demand begins to come down, the Fed is not going to have accomplished its mission. It is going to be a fun time.

TN: So we hear from Eric that markets are discovering prices. We hear that the Fed is discovering its level. So on some level, nobody really knows what the destination is here. They think they do, but they don’t. Right. So the Fed seeing 4.5 terminal rate or whatever, is just like Eric saying, three thousand, three hundred S and P, right?

EB: I don’t think everybody was talking about the palate of it as far as the market is concerned. And it’s just my personal feeling until you get to the prepandemic high, powell doesn’t care about the market in July. At his press conference in July, I was like, here we go, this is going to be it. I listened to it and I was like, damn, he’s hawkers. And the market rallies. And then I started hearing, oh, they’re going to pivot, they’re going to pivot. And then dad came out the last week in August, or, you know, that Friday before the last week and said, son, ain’t done. 

If you didn’t take the clue from July, you certainly should have taken it from August. And then even in his press conference in September, he had the perfect scenario in the market to rally this thing, hundreds of points. And all he had to do is say, hey, it’s working. We’re on our path. Everything’s cool. Month on month.

Things are slowing down, right? Yeah, everything is doing exactly what we thought it was. And he came out and he did it again. We’re not done yet. We’re coming after your house and we’ve got to get some people out of the workforce. I don’t know what else you need.

TN: Well, I said earlier this week, everybody is, whether they’ll tell you or not, everybody is secretly hoping the Fed will save their portfolio. Everybody’s secretly hoping for that.

EB: I haven’t done the math over, say, from 17 to 22 or whatever it is, but my guess is before this is all over, that average gain you’ve had in your four hundred and one K over the last 20 years or so, you’re coming back to it.

TN: So Sam, just a question that’s been in the back of my mind before we wrap this up on your side is

we really started to see inflation accelerate last probably November of 21, something like that, right? October, November, somewhere in there, is it possible we see base effects kick in at some point around inflation? And does the fed care?

SR: There’s a possibility we begin to see base effects on headline. With energy prices coming down, food costs beginning to moderate somewhat. But remember, shelter wasn’t running last year at all, right. And shelter is a much larger component of CPI. It’s a smaller component of PC, but it’s a much larger portion of CPI. So in a way you’re likely to see a headline begin to headline, CPI, everything begin to have those base effects take hold. But on core you’re in trouble if you’re betting on base effects.

That’s the dynamic there. And the other thing is it’s been a much broader base this year on the month over month accelerations that you’ve seen. So that’s something to pay attention to. The base effects are not here to save you. 

TN: Okay, good. I just wanted to get that out there because it does come up, but it is in the back of my mind, I’ve heard people say it and I just wanted to make sure that’s on the table. Okay, thanks for that.

EB: I’ll give you my N equal one sample. So we moved down, we sold the house, we moved down here to Houston for a couple of years and didn’t want to buy. I should have because I would have made a lot of money. But. November is my lease renewal. It’s my power to choose renewal and everything. And I’m looking at 15% to 20% on housing and electric this November. It’s still ugly. It’s still ugly.

TN: Okay, great. Let’s move into speaking of energy prices, Tracy, you put a Tweet out earlier this week talking about the high natural gas prices pushing European manufacturers to shift to the US.

So really interesting to me, I think we’ve seen kind of some China manufacturing start to shift to the US. Interesting to hear about european manufacturing shifting to the US. Can you tell us a little bit more about that? What’s driving it, and what sectors do you expect? 

TS: All right, so Disney kind of has to go back to this fall in Europe. When prices started spiking, we started seeing a lot of the smelting industry come offline, and that had because of high natural gas prices, everybody forget all of this started happening pre Ukraine invasion. So this all really started I mean, it was years in the making, but this really did start happening really in the fall where we really started to see these effects. And of course, with high national gas prices, they have secondary and tertiary effects, such as if you can’t produce fertilizer because that prices are too high, then meat packers are in trouble that buy the CO2 from the fertilizer companies.

So we started kind of seeing a meltdown of these supply chains because of high natural gas prices and then moving forward, if we look, we have almost 40% of fertilizer production is offline in Europe right now. We have iron, copper, nickel, aluminum, zinc smelters, and stainless steel mills all offline too. Over 50% of their metal capacity is down right now. And these companies, if you’re a smelter, they’re so energy intensive, you can’t just restart those up again.

It takes months to bring those back online. So what’s happening is a lot of those companies already have or are considering moving to the US. They either have plants in the US. Or are planning to move to the US. Just because our energy prices are a lot lower. And the cost after shuttering production. The. Cost to bring that up back online is very expensive. Of course, all of those metal companies, they’re going to affect manufacturing. So, I mean, you’re up some big trouble right now. The energy prices are too high.

All their industries is a huge supply chain, right. You have to know it just goes all the way down the supply chain so that supply chains are going to be screwed up for a very long time, and they’re not even better after covet. The other issue is with Europe, they’re going to have a problem with this. They’re still focusing on there’s still tripled down on the screen energy. So what it’s also going to force them to do is to rely on China even more because China provides a lot of the materials necessary to build out, say, solar panels and windmills and things of that nature.

TN: Okay, so where primarily is the industry coming from? Europe? Would it be northern Europe where a lot of these smelters and fertilizer plants and stuff are about it? Where is that general?

TS: A lot of those are well, really, it’s across eight countries. So you have France, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Germany, Netherlands, Montenegro, and Spain.

TN: Okay, and so where would they go? Do they need places that are close to transportation, cheap energy, these sorts of things. Are those the priorities for them?

TS: It really depends on it depends on where they are. Right. I mean, you could essentially build a plant like times like the oil industry does. They find wells. Right. Then they build the town around it. That essentially can happen too. We haven’t really seen any solid moves yet. It’s more of a kind of a speculatory thing of this nature right now. So we kind of have to keep an eye on that to see if indeed they do move to the US. Because I would also think that they’re probably looking at Mexico, where labor is a lot cheaper in South America, labor’s.

TN: Cheaper in Mexico, and power prices are deregulated in Mexico, too, and that happened, what, seven or eight years ago? So they are competitive on the power price site as well. 

TS: So I would say let’s keep an eye on that. Honestly, there are no solid moves at this point. 

TN: Any chance they’ll move to Asia, or are they already too dependent on Asia?

TS: I think after Koba kind of scoops them from Asia in general, even though, ironically, they’re going to have to rely on China a lot more active. 

TN: Okay, interesting. Definitely something to keep an eye on. Okay. Thank you, Tracy. So, guys, let’s just go around real quick. And what are you looking for for the week ahead? Eric, let’s start with you. What kind of levels are you looking for for next week?

EB: Well, we’ll see how we close this week.  I’m still hoping we get under $3,700. We test that 2022 low, really get a good flush in the market. And so I’m kind of looking at that 3650 if we can close it at the lowest, and we’ll see what we get out of if we get some short covering coming into the weekend.

TN: I don’t know why you would, but if you do, where do we get to?

EB: But as long as we’re under that 37.80, I’m looking for lower prices.

TN: Okay, great. Tracy, what are you looking for on the energy side? 

TS: I mean, I think it’s mostly the same. I think everybody’s in that we have an OPEC meeting coming up right at the end of September, beginning of October. So I think everybody’s going to be focused on that. There’s whispers of larger cuts, like, not the token one hundred K that there was last time. So I’m sure that everybody is going to be focused. I’m sure there’s going to be a million rumors this week.

Sure, up and down, OPEC, job voting everywhere. But I think that most people involved in the energy industry are going to be kind of looking towards OPEC plus.

TN: And is there a lot of fear in OPEC that crew is going to go into the 70s or 60s, or are they seeing things continue to rise? 

TS: It’s really a strong dollar story, but is that really the main fear. They would like obviously they would like higher prices. They would like closer to $100. Fundamentally, this market is still tight. Okay. So I think that’s their main concern. If they need to spook it, I mean, they’re not making product.

TN: Real quick, what are you looking for that we get? 

SR: I’m just watching the dollar and what all the Fed speak comes out at, basically. Are they doubling down on last week, or are they trying to walk it back and what that does with the dollar and whether or not we can get the dollar to be looking a little peeky here.

TN: Thank you so much.

Learn more about CI Futures here: https://completeintel.com/2022Promo

It has been a terrible week in markets. It is not looking good for anybody, at least on the long side. A lot of that seemed to change when the CPI number came out. It’s like people woke up and terminal rate is going to be higher and just everything flushes out.

We talked through why the dollar is where it is and how long we expect it to stay there. Brent Johnson recently said that the USD & equities will both rise. And so we dived a little bit deep into that. We also looked at crude.

Crude’s obviously been falling. Tracy discussed how long is that going to last.

We also did a little bit of Fed talk because the Fed meets this week. And we want to really understand when does the Fed stop? After last week’s US CPI print, the terminal rate rose from 4% pretty dramatically. Does QT accelerate?

Key themes:
1. $USD 🚀
2. How low will crude oil go?
3. When does the Fed stop?
4. The Week Ahead

This is the 34th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:
Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Brent: https://twitter.com/SantiagoAuFund
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Time Stamps
0:00 Start
1:20 Key themes for this episode
2:24 What got us to stronger USD and will it continue to rise?
8:29 Dedollarization
10:23 Intervention in the dollar if it gets too strong?
12:22 Both the USD and US equities will be rising?
14:18 Crude: how low can it go?
18:03 Look at the curves for crude
19:17 Slingshot in December?
20:18 How India and China buys Russian oil and resell
21:33 Restock the SPR at $80??
22:57 When does the Fed stop raising rates?
29:33 What if Russia, Ukraine, and China don’t lock down anymore?
32:08 What’s for the week ahead?

Listen to the podcast version on Spotify here:

Transcript

Tony Nash: Hi everybody, and welcome to The Week Ahead. My name is Tony Nash. We’re joined today by Tracy Shuchart and Brent Johnson. So thanks guys for joining us, really appreciate the time to talk about what’s going on in markets this week and next week.

Before we get started, I want to remind you of our $50 promo for CI Futures. CI Futures is a subscription platform to get forecast for thousands of items: currencies commodities, equity indices and economics. The currencies commodities equities are refreshed every week. So every Monday you come in for a new forecast, economics forecast every month. That $50 a month promo ends on September 21. So please take a look now go in and check it out and if you have any questions, let us know, we’re happy to answer them. So thanks for taking the time to do that.

So, Brent and Tracy, it has been a terrible week in markets. It is not looking good for really anybody, at least on the long side. And so a lot of that seemed to change when the CPI number came out. It’s like people woke up and we’re like, oh no, the term rate is going to be higher and just everything flushes out, right. And earnings and a bunch of other stuff. So we can go into a lot of specifics. But one of the items that I’ve been really curious about for weeks, if not years, ever since I met Brent in 2018, 19, is the dollar. So we’re going to go a little bit deep into the dollar today.

We’re also going to look at crude. Crude’s obviously been falling. So we’re going to ask Tracy kind of how long is that going to last? And then we’re going to do a little bit of Fed talk because the Fed meets in the week ahead. And I want to really understand kind of when does the Fed stop.

So those are our key themes today.

So, Brent, welcome. Thanks again for joining us. I’d really like to talk through the dollar and we are where we are, which is amazing. And you have seen this years ago. On the screen, I’ve got a chart of our CI Futures forecast which shows a dollar continuing to rise over the next year. We’ve got some bumps in there, but for the most part we see a persistently strong dollar.

So I’m curious what got us here and what will continue to push the dollar higher?

Brent Johnson: Sure. Well, first of all, thanks for having me. I always enjoy talking to you, Tony. The reason I like talking to you is you’ll talk a lot about Asia, but you’ve actually lived there and you actually know what you’re talking about rather than people who’ve just read it in a book. And same with Tracy. So I’m happy to do this and happy to do it anytime you invite me.

But anyway, what’s really going on with the dollar is a function of the fact that it’s not only the Fed and it’s not only the US that has, for lack of a better word, idiotic leaders. The rest of the world does, too.

And I think over the last several years. At least in the retail investment world. There’s been this theme that the Fed is out of control. The government’s out of control. They’re going to spend all this money. The dollar is going to pay the price. And it’s going to get inflated away and go to zero. And the rest of the world is going to do great and we’re going to do poor.

And I understand that view if you just analyze the United States. But the problem is you can’t just analyze the United States because it’s a big world and everything is interconnected. And all of the problems that people have forecast to fall upon the US.

Dollar are currently happening to a greater extent in Europe and Asia. And the budget deficits, the printing of the money, the central bank support, the holding down of rates, all of that applies even more so to Japan and Europe than it does the United States. And that’s really what you’re seeing.

Over the last, let’s just call a year, you’ve seen the yen fall 20% versus the dollar. That is an incredible move for any currency, but it is an absolutely astonishing move for a major currency, specifically the third biggest currency in the world, or some would even argue the second biggest currency in the world. And then you’ve seen the euro over the last year is down 10% or 15%. 

So these are very big moves. Again, the reason is because the Fed is raising rates. So on a relative basis, we have higher rates than those two big competitors. And on a relative basis, those two big competitors are doing more monetary stimulus or QE or extraordinary measures, however you want to define that central bank activity.

And you always because the globe runs on the dollar, there is a persistent and consistent bid for the dollar globally. And so it’s really a supply versus the demand issue. Now, everybody always focuses on the supply. Central banks are increasing the currency in circulation. They’re going to print all this money and so therefore the dollar falls or the currency falls. Well, that’s just focusing on the supply side. 

But again, you have to remember that all central banks are increasing supply, but the demand is what makes the difference and that there is global demand for the dollar. Now, whether you think there should be, whether you think it’s the right thing, it doesn’t really matter. It just is. That’s the way the system works.

But there is not that same global demand for yen. There’s not that same global demand for yuan, there’s not the same global demand for euros or Reals or Florence or Liras or anything. 

And so what you’re really seeing play out is Trifan’s dilemma. And so I’ve spoken about this before. But Trifon’s dilemma is an economic theory that states that if you have a single country’s currency that also serves as the global reserve currency, at some point the needs of the domestic economy for that global reserve currency will come into conflict with the needs of the global economy. And that’s what we have.

We have an inflationary pressure problem in the United States. The Fed is very embarrassed about it. They got it wrong and now they need to do something about it. And they’re bound and determined to try to bring it under control. And so they’re raising rates to counteract that. Well, when you raise rates, you’re tightening the monetary supply. And that’s happening. That’s fine for the US. But there’s many countries around the world that cannot handle that right now.

But that’s what’s happening. And so the needs of the domestic economy are in conflict with the needs of the global economy. And it’s going to be the global economy that suffers more than the domestic economy as a result. It doesn’t mean that the domestic economy won’t be hurt. It just means on a relative basis, you want to be closer to the money than far away from the money. And because we have the global reserve currency, we’re closer to the money.

TN: So it’s interesting when you talk about the dollar versus other currencies, and we often hear people say, oh, CNY is rising as a share of spend, which that’s debatable. But from my perspective, it’s not the dollar that’s kind of in the gladiator ring of currencies. It’s the yen, it’s the euro, it’s the British pound, it’s the aussie dollar, it’s these secondary currencies. They’re going to lose share before the dollar does. Is that wrong?

BJ: No, I think that’s absolutely right. And again, that’s a very good way to put it. I know gladiator walks into the ring and thinks, I’m not going to at least get a few scratches. It’s going to hurt. That’s just the nature of being a gladiator. But what matters is who’s standing at the end of the day, right? And so I think it’s these other currencies are getting hurt by the battle more so than the dollar. It doesn’t mean that we’re not getting hurt. It doesn’t mean it doesn’t sting. It doesn’t mean there isn’t going to be any pain involved. But at the end of the day, if you’re at war, you want to be the last man standing because of the way the system is designed, I believe that that will be the US dollar.

The other thing that I would just quickly point out is a lot of people say, why can’t you see it? It’s very obvious. The rest of the world wants to de-dollarize. They’re putting all of these trade deals in place, the dollars falling as a percent of reserves, etc. And the point I would make is, yes, I do see it. I agree with you the world would like to dedollarize, but it’s much harder to dedollarize than just saying, just because you put an announcement out there doesn’t mean you’re actually going to be able to do it.

I’d like to make the analogy that I’ve said I want to lose weight and get in great shape for 20 years. It doesn’t mean it’s going to happen. It hasn’t happened yet. 

But that’s the headline versus reality, right? I just think that’s where we’re at. And the dollar, for better or worse, it’s a rigged game in favor of the dollar. And the US set it up that way is the global hegemon. They set it up that way. Now, it doesn’t mean they’re not trying. It doesn’t mean that the world doesn’t want to get away from it. It’s just very hard to do it.

The last thing I’ll say and I’ll shut up, but the other thing I would say is the process of de-dollarization, even if it is successful, will not be a calm transition. And the process of dedollarization is not necessarily, and in my opinion, not probable to be negative for the price of the dollar. I think the volatility and the lack of liquidity in dollars that would go along with de-dollarization would actually squeeze the price of the dollar higher.

And so it doesn’t matter to me whether de-dollarization happens or not. I think the dollar is going higher for all of these reasons.

TN: I think what’s funny there is people always put de-dollarization in this almost moralistic language. It’s a good or a bad thing. And it’s just not. It just is.

Tracy Shuchart: I just had a question for Brent. I mean, do you see at any point that there’s some kind of intervention on the dollar? The dollar gets too strong because it’s going to crush emerging markets? Do you think there’s any point in which Yellen kind of backs up?

BJ: I do think they will. And that’s why I think the dollar is going to go back to all-time highs before this is all said and done. I don’t think it’s going to be a straight line. It can’t be a straight line without absolute devastation. Doesn’t mean it can’t happen. But I think this is going to play out over several years rather than several weeks. It could play out over several weeks, but I think it will take longer.  And the reason I think it will take longer is I think that they will interact or they will get involved, as you’re suggesting, Tracy. 

I actually think right now the Fed and the Treasury want the dollar strong. I think they’re using it as a weapon or as a tool. It’s something that can be used very effectively. Again, whether you think it should be used or not, I don’t care. I just think it will be, and I think it is being and so I think that will continue.

But I think the Fed and the treasury, they want the dollar higher, but they want it done in a measured fashion that they can control. If it starts to get out of control, I think that they will rein it in. I think they want some of the other parts of the world to be an economic pain, but I don’t think they want the whole system to collapse. And so my guess is that we’ll get the dollar higher, maybe it goes to 115, 120, and then they’ll do something, it’ll pull back for six months, three months, whatever, and then it’ll get higher again and they’ll come out and do something.

So I think this will be a process, a little bit of a roller coaster, up and down, but I think that the general trend is higher and I think there’s more pain to come for the global economy as a result.

TN: Brent, real quick, before we get onto oil. You sent out a tweet earlier this week that said you think that we’re going to come to a point where both the dollar and equities and US equities are rising. Can you walk us through that just real quickly? I know there’s a very detailed thesis behind that, but can you walk us through that very quickly so we understand kind of what you’re talking about there?

BJ: Yeah, so the first thing I’ll say for anybody who’s just kind of passing through this conversation is that I don’t think this is happening right now. It could happen right now. In the short term, I expect US equities to go lower. I think that’s just kind of where markets are headed.

But as the pain develops throughout the global economy, I think we are going to experience a global sovereign debt crisis. And when the world, the US included, starts selling sovereign debt rather than buying sovereign debt, I think that money will have to go.

Now, some of the money will just be, it’ll just go poof. It’ll be gone. And so that money won’t have anywhere to go but the people who start selling the bonds looking for another place to go, I think the next best place to go will eventually be US equities. And I think US equities will be seen as the new… I don’t want to say new Treasuries.

That’s a little bit hard to say. But on a relative basis, the place where big global capital can go, that is the most advantageous to them. And so I think we will get into a point in the sovereign debt crisis where US equities will get safe haven flows and I think the whole world will potentially be printing more money, right.

So be sending more liquidity out there. And so I think that liquidity that is generated with little liquidity there is, I think we’ll find its way into the US and the US Dow, big blue chip stocks and I think they’ll go higher. I might be wrong on that, but that’s my working thesis as of right now.

TN: Let’s move on to crude oil. Obviously we’ve seen crude take some hits over the past few weeks and we’ve got a WTI chart on the screen right now.

So how low will crude go? Are we almost there? Are we headed to 65 where it was for a while? And what then pushes it higher? 

TS: I don’t really want to forecast exactly where crude is going to go. I definitely think that we could see some more downside, but we have to look at what is weighing on price and sentiment right now. One, there’s more Russian barrels on the market than everybody anticipated. 

Two, you’ve got never ending zero Covid China lockdown that haven’t seemed to let up yet. We also have EU recession, right? And then we had 160 million barrels of SPR thrown on the market. And so that’s really weighing kind of on the front end of the curve. Those are the things kind of weighing on sentiment right now. That’s why we’re seeing a lot of weakness. 

That said, if we look at the fundamentals of the market, the market is still very tight. We’re still drawing globally. We definitely have a diesel problem that is global. And I think where we start to see kind of a change in this, I think when it comes to the end of October, when the SPR is done this with kind of been looking over the last couple of weeks, had we not had such large SPRs, we would have actually been drawing a regular stock.

So it’s not as if that oil is going piling up anywhere. So I think as soon as the SPR stops, I think after Midterms, because I think this administration is trying to do whatever they can to suppress the price of oil, thus, gasoline. And I also think that we have to see kind of what happens in China after the People’s Party Congress in the middle of October and trying to see what their policy is going to be moving forward.

Are they going to open up? I mean, they’re looking at they want 5.5% YoY GDP by the end of the year,

which… 

TN: They’ll hit it. On the nose, we can guarantee that. 

TS: But I think they’re going to have to start stimulating the economy a little bit more. And we kind of saw announcement Evergrande is going to start financing more inspection projects and whatnot going into starting at the end of September. So I think we’ll probably see the last quarter if we get a little stimulus and if they back on their policy because, that’s the big thing for oil right now, is that if that demand comes back because they’re down about 2.7% on the year and as far as consumption is concerned.

So I think if that demand comes rushing back, know that’s going to be a huge upside surprise for the market. I think over the long run, oil is going higher, but out looking out into 2023, I just think that’s just the trajectory of it. I’m not calling for $200 oil, anything crazy like that. I just think that we will see higher oil, and I think we’re poised to see higher for longer than the functionality of the market and the fact that we have no capex for the last seven years.

TN: So last month you said to look three to four months out, look at the curves three to four months out to understand kind of what the real oil price was or is going to be. And so that would be two to three months now. So that’s November. December. 

TS: Look at those spreads are widening out or not, right. You want to see if we’re moving into more backwardation and even more backward dated market, right? So you kind of want to look at that.

TN: Okay, so I paid $2.88 a gallon for gas at my local last night. We’re the energy capital in the world. Yeah, I’m going to show it off. Anyway, that is kind of coming down. And energy has been the biggest upward factor in some of the inflation issues. That’s good news, at least until the election. Hey, I’ll take it while I can get it, right? And if it heads back up after the election, I think we’re all prepared for that on some level.

So I guess SPR, as he said, election happens, there’s no political reason necessarily to suppress these prices and so on and so forth. So do you expect to see almost a slingshot in, say, December, where things trend higher pretty quickly?

TS: I don’t think we’ll have… I don’t want to call it a slingshot because anything can happen in the oil market. I mean, we’ve seen $7 to $10 in a day before, so that’s not unheard of. But I do think we go higher, especially if you’re looking into the market, is going to get even tighter in December because of tax reasons. December 31 is the tax assessment date for the barrels that you have on hand. So they tend to pull back on production so they can move out inventory as much as they can, so they’re not taxed at the end of the year.

Usually we see a little decline in production anyway in December and the second half of December, we do see prices start to rebound off the seasonal for regular seasonal trend low.  Okay, so that would be normal.

TN: Brent, I think you had a question for Tracy on crude markets as well.

BJ: Yeah, I actually had two quick questions. One, I wanted to get your thoughts on the fact that India and China are buying oil at a discount from Russia. And then there’s lots of stories about them selling that oil

on to Europe or other places. And so they’re making that spread. I just wanted to get your thoughts on that and logistically how that actually takes place.

TS: So if you’re looking at India, definitely they are buying discounted crude. What they do is they don’t

resell that to Europe. What they do is they blend it and they sell fuel. So that’s refined. So it’s really hard to trace what’s in… They don’t trace those barrels that way.

So that’s how that oil is kind of emerging back in Europe. It’s really by way of refined products. Now when we talk about China with the gas, really what they’re doing is they’re buying gas right now, literally half off from Russia, and they’re turning around and selling their own gas to Europe for the higher marked up. The gas they already have. So they’re selling the gas they already have? So that’s kind of how that’s working.

BJ: And then the other question I have for you quickly is I was surprised this week when the rumor was floated by whoever floated that they would restock the SPR at $80. It seems like they’re doing everything they can to get the price lower. And then to have that rumor come out and put kind of a floor under it was kind of surprising to me. So maybe nothing more than just the speculation, but did you have any thoughts on that? 

TS: Yeah, I mean, basically they put a floor on it. Everybody’s calling it, the Biden put now. But the thing is that it’s all nice and well if they want to do that, they still got enough 60 million barrels that they need to release. And then by the time those contracts go through and you want to refill the SPR, I mean, that’s months away. We’re looking at months and months down the road. And who knows what oil price would be? To me, it was just another try to jaw bone market down lower.

BJ: It kind of reminded me of the ECB where they’re raising rates on one hand, but they’re buying bonds with the other. Biden wants his cap. He’s like got a collar on it. He’s trying to put a cap on it and a foot on it.

TN: Strategy. Let’s move on to a little bit more of kind of the Fed kind of Fed talk. There’s a Fed meeting next week, and when CPI came out this week, the terminal rate really rose very quickly. And that’s when we started to see equities fall pretty dramatically. And we’ve got on the screen right now expectations for the rates coming out of each meeting. So 75 in September, 75 in November, and another 50 in December. That has accelerated the expectations for the Fed by about 25-50 basis points?

When does the Fed stop, basically from where you are now, do you think this continues to accelerate in 2023 or given, let’s say, CPI? Of course on a year-on-year basis it looks terrible. But once we get to November, when CPI really started to accelerate, November 21, do we start to see some of those base effects in a year-on-year basis and the Fed starts to pull back a little bit and go, okay, wait a minute, maybe we’re okay with the plan we have when we stop at say 450 or whatever as a terminal rate.

The other complicating factor will add in there is University of Michigan came out, University of Michigan survey came out on Friday and it’s a bit lower than what was expected. And the Fed has really been looking to University of Michigan, which is kind of a semi-serious survey, but they’ve really used that to justify some of their decisions.

So we obviously have a mixed environment. But I’m wondering, with all of this stuff coming out this week, do we expect the Fed to keep marching pretty aggressively into 2023?

BJ: I’ll take that first. So I actually do expect them to keep marching higher into 2023. And I say that for a couple of reasons, and I’m going to qualify this and say that they will pivot when they have to pivot, but I don’t think they’re going to pivot until they have to pivot. And so I think a lot of people that are predicting the pivot are misunderstanding the Fed’s intentions and perhaps for a good reason. They’ve done a fantastic job of ruining their credibility. So it’s understandable not to believe them.

But in this case, I think you kind of have to believe them. And I’ll tell you why I think you have to believe them. Number one, I think they don’t mind the dollar being stronger. Again, I think that’s kind of policy that I spoke of earlier in conjunction with the treasury. 

Number two, I think they want asset prices lower. So the fact that the stock market goes down I don’t think would bother them. I think if the Dow was at 28,000 and the S&P was at 3600, I think they’d say that’s totally fine. I don’t think they have a problem with that as long as it’s not collapsing. Right? Now, if it collapses, then they have to come in. And they will come in,  but I don’t think they mind if the stock market is 10% or 20% lower than here.

The third thing I’d say is the Fed central banks in general, they’re always lagging. They’re a reactionary agency. They’re not a predictive agency. We all know that. They can’t predict anything anyway. I’m not sure I want them predicting things, but to me they’re always behind the curve because they always wait until they see it and then they react, right? They come in and they try to save the day. So when things get really bad, then they’ll eventually come in and provide support.

And when things are always too late to tighten as they are now, and then they try to make up for it. So I think they’re going to despite, like you said, the Michigan number starting to come down, Atlanta Feds already slash their GDP. So even though they’re getting these signals that things are slowing down, they’re not reacting to it yet. They will react to it late.

And then the fourth thing I’d say is that I think Powell is mad and he’s pouting, right? Not just Powell, but mainly Powell, but he got all this advice from all his staff and however many staff, PhD staffers they have at the Fed, and they all said inflation is transitory and it’s going to be fine. And then it wasn’t. Right? Now he’s mad.

TN: He’s a lawyer, not an economist.

BJ: And I’m going to do something about it. And if you don’t think that I can bring inflation down, well, then you just watch me, right? And I’ll take my ball and go home. And his ball is interest rate. So he’s taking them higher, and he’s taking them home, he’s taking them higher. And so it come hell or high water, and after the, I don’t know, the chink in their armor or the threat to their credibility that they’ve had over the last year or two, I think the last thing in the world that Powell wants to deal with is the fact that he slowed down or, God forbid, cut rates and then inflation kept going higher.

That would look even worse than waiting for it to crumble, right? So I think for all of those reasons, you kind of have to take them at their word. Again, I’m not saying not unless the markets force them to do it

and the markets might force them to do it. I’m not saying that that’s out of the possibility. The only thing I don’t like saying about this is this is the hole they’re going to hike until it breaks theory, right?

And I agree with that. The thing I don’t like about it is everybody else seems to agree with it now, too. That seems to be the common refrain, is that they’re going to hike until something breaks, and everybody says, yeah, that’s kind of what’s going to happen. Usually when everybody thinks something, it doesn’t happen that way. But as long as equity prices are higher and as long as inflationary prints keep coming in high, I think they continue hiking.

And think about it, inflation could fall by 30%, and it’s still at five or six, which is still two or three times higher than their goal. So is there a path to a pivot? Yes, I think there’s a path to a pivot, but every week, when people come out every week and, oh, they’re going to pivot, they’re going to pivot. I don’t think they’re pivoting next week, and I don’t think they’re pivoting in October unless they have to.

TN: Okay, Tracy, what do you think of that? 

TS: Yeah, I absolutely agree. All the data coming in, there’s no way they’re not doing 75 next week. In my opinion. I could be wrong. Somebody will come back. I think that’s pretty much a lock. 

TN: Yeah, I think short of, let’s say sometime in Q4, Russia, Ukraine ends, and China says we’re not going to lock down anymore, that would fundamentally change the Feds calculations, right? 

BJ: Well, if they weren’t locked down anymore and it pushed demand higher and it pushed prices higher as a result of demand increasing, then to me, that would keep them on their path to hiking. The flip side. And the flip side is that if something breaks in China, and China has to devalue or revalue the yuan in order to deal with the real estate collapse or the internal problems, whatever it is, that could send a deflationary wave to the rest of the world.

So I’m not going to sit here and deny the inflationary pressures that we’re seeing, but I think to a certain extent, people have again dumped themselves into the inflation camp or the deflation camp, and I think we’re going to have periods of both.

I think if you fundamentally understand the design of the monetary system, the threat of a deflationary

wave is always there. But if you don’t admit that the inflationary pressures are here, I think you’ve also got your head in the sand. I’ve said this several times, but I will admit to a big mistake, and that is, for several years, I hated the term stagflation. I thought it was a cop out. I thought it was for people who just couldn’t decide if they were in the inflation or deflation camp. But I think that’s what we have, and I think we have it in spades. I think some assets and some prices are going to continue to rise and be higher, and I think others are going to collapse, and that’s what makes it so hard to deal with.

So to anybody I ever took a shot at for them using stagflation as a cop out, I apologize. I’m with you now. I got that part wrong.

TN: Brent, one of the things I admire about you is you’re not afraid to say you were wrong, right?

BJ: No. I mean, do you mind if I just make a comment on this really quick? I think too often in our business, people will make a call and then they’re just so afraid to change it. Or you’ll make a call, and then somebody else will call you out on it if you got it wrong. At the end of the day, our job is sort of to predict the future. And so anybody who thinks that they can accurately predict the future 100% of the time has the biggest ego in the history of the world.

The reason I don’t mind making predictions is number one. I don’t mind being wrong because I don’t think I’m the smartest guy in history. And if I get something wrong, then I’ll have to deal with it. But this idea that we’re always going to be right and we know everything, it’s ridiculous. So anyway, we’re all speculating at the end of the day.

TN: That’s right. Okay, real quickly, guys, what are you looking for in the week ahead? More the same. More the same disappointment, difficulties, headwind, all that stuff. Until the Fed meeting? Is that what we’re looking for until the press conference?

TS: Yeah, I think we’re the markets will be in limbo, definitely until the Fed. I mean, everybody expects 75. We get 75. Maybe we see a bounce in equity, actually, because it’s already done with, right. There’s no question anymore.  So maybe we get a bounce after that. 

TN: Slightly less hawkish language than is expected, right? 

BJ: I think that’s right. Now we’ve got the potential of maybe 100 basis points, right. So if they come in a couple of weeks ago, although now there’s a path to pivot, they’re probably only going to do 50 basis points in September. 

Well, then we got the CPI print and it’s 75. That’s 75 is going to happen. Then a couple of people go hundreds now on the table, right? So now if they only come out and do 75, maybe the market kind of breathes a little bit. At least it wasn’t 100. So my guess is that we would have some volatility leading up to the meeting. Maybe they do 75. Perhaps things get a little bit of a bounce as a breather. 

But I don’t think markets are going to change a whole lot between now and the election. I think they’re going to be volatile. I think the Feds are going to keep hiking. And I think Market Powell said it himself. We had the boom and now we have to deal with the pain. This is the unfortunate side effect of what we have to do. So he’s telling you he’s going to cause pain. He just doesn’t want to collapse. So if it starts to collapse, it’s the sad truth.

TN: Guys, thank you so much for your time. Thank you so much. Have a great weekend and have a great week ahead.

Learn more about CI Futures here: https://completeintel.com/2022Promo

This past week, we’ve seen a lot happen in equity markets. But what’s looming in the background of all of this is geopolitics. And so, in this episode, we talked about the long tail of Europe’s energy crisis. We also looked at the impact of US Dollar strength on the EU and to a lesser extent EM. Lastly, we discussed the growing US-India tensions over the Russian oil cap.

Key themes:
1. Long tail of Europe’s energy crisis
2. Impact of USD strength on EU & EM
3. US-India tensions over Russian oil cap

——————————————————————–

This is the 33rd episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon/
Velina: https://twitter.com/vtchakarova

Listen to the podcast version on Spotify here:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0v3kIyW0V3MRBmoS16kkYU?si=b0a94661e62249a8

Transcript

Tony Nash: Today we’re focusing on geopolitics really. We’re joined by Albert Marko and we have a special guest, Velina Tchakarova, joining us from Vienna. Velina, thanks so much for taking the time to join the Week Ahead this Week.

Velina Tchakarova: Thank you, Tony. And it’s great to discuss with Albert as well.

TN: Fantastic. Before we get started, I’d like all of our viewers to note that our promotion on CI Futures ends on September 21. So this is $50 for CI Futures. 3000 assets forecast, economics, currencies, commodities, equity indices, forecast every month. We have weekly forecasts for currencies, commodities and equity indices. That promo ends on September 21, so please check it out. And if you have any questions, send us a note. We’re happy to give demos, do whatever you need to bring you over the line on that.

So this past week we’ve seen a lot happen in equity markets, but what’s looming in the background of all of this is geopolitics. And so really what we’re talking about this week, since we’re focusing on geopolitics, is the long tail of Europe’s energy crisis. We’re looking at the impact of US dollar strength on the EU and to a lesser extent EM, but mostly on the EU, as well as the US-India tensions or growing US-India tensions over the Russian oil cap.

So Velina, Albert. Let’s really get started. I’d like to talk a little bit about the energy crisis. And of course, we understand there’s been a lot of talk about kind of the coming winter and what’s happening the coming winter, and that’s well covered. We’ve done that for the past few weeks here. But I’m really curious about how long is this expected to last and what do you think will be the long term impacts of the energy crisis in Europe?

VT: Well, that is definitely a question that is hard to answer, but let me give you a try. Now. First and foremost, as we know, the energy crisis in Europe has been already ongoing before the war was launched on February 24 and it still has structural factors, structural causes, and of course, with the war being inflationary, these causes have been further amplified. 

Now on the side of the fossil fuel dependencies, because I need to answer the question whether it’s going to be short or long. And I am actually inclined to think that this energy crisis is here to stay and it’s going to have a long term impact not only on European markets and European economies, but also in general, we have to also think of the global context of the energy crisis. So, on the side of the fossil fuels, you have a serious situation how to cut off an individual energy supplier.

Only to give you the idea, in terms of gas, it’s not easy in the short term to diversify away from 170 billion cubic meters of Russian gas. So that already shows you that it’s a tough scenario. Of course there are some opportunities mostly coming from the United States in terms of LNG. The European countries have also reached out to other potential suppliers. But as we know, this takes time. And I argue that two thirds of Russian gas being cut off for December, as this is the plan, is going to probably not work out the way it was planned. 

But still I also don’t see a scenario in which there is coming back to Russian gas. When it comes to the oil, 90% of the oil should be cut off. That worked better in a sense because most of the economies were diversified. 

Now, what we are observing, of course is on the one side that of course there is a main narrative to go, let’s say to speed up the decorbonization. That means to transition towards renewables, which of course is going to have effect also on economies and on all these relevant networks. Why? Because on the one side you’re going to have a surging demand for commodities. 

And by the way, when we talk about decarbonization, you know very well that processing and production of critical raw materials is more or less located in China and also in other not like minded partners, partially also in Russia. So in a sense you end up in a similar scenario. When it comes to also the plan of, let’s say to use nuclear energy, once again we see a bifurcation within the European members because some of them are vehemently against it, including Austria. Germany is considering to close the last three nuclear plants even now in a situation of crisis. And then again we have countries like France which are rooting for nuclear energy as part of the energy portfolio. And of course, finally you have also the dirty coal, which once again is now going to be used as a transitionary energy source. Why? Because there are not many options on the table.

So to summarize, the situation is critical. It’s going to be a lot of political, let’s say messaging in terms of cutting off consumption, reducing electricity consumption, cutting off gas consumption, oil, so on and so forth. But then again it’s going to be also about diversifying and it’s also going to be finally about decarbonizing. So obviously, all of these goals are long term oriented and I’m not expecting any short term outcome.

Albert Marko: Yeah, that’s interesting, Velina, I had read just recently that the European grid is very complex where all the member states, not just within the European Union, but reaching all the way into Eastern Europe and the Ukraine is all connected. I can see a situation where the French might use this as a political power play against the Germans or the Dutch or so on and so forth because they can basically corner the market and the output for power because I think they have like 57 nuclear reactors. There could be situations where there could be political discourse within the European Union going forward for the coming years. 

VT: Well, when it comes to the grid systems, it’s also important to understand that in general, the grid systems of the European states are not at the level that they can operate in a scenario of, let’s say 40 to 50% share of renewables. So maybe with few exceptions right now, like I think immediately of the exception of Sweden, some countries managed to speed up the process of increasing the share of renewables, but still we are not there yet, which means of course, that going towards increased share of renewables in the energy portfolio of each individual European state is going to affect the grid system.

As Albert said, the grid system is also interconnected. So that means a lot of ripple effects. In the case of Austria, blackouts are actually on the agenda in our national risk scenario for the next three to five years. So the anticipation for blackouts in the case of Austria at least, and I think that in other countries is a similar picture, we are going to witness with the proceeding towards decarbonization also scenario in which there will be more blackouts.

Then again, of course, here the question is when it comes to electricity, right? We are still not diversified to the point and I once again have to use the example of Austria. Austria is a front runner in terms of electricity that is being produced based on renewables, and yet 25% is still dependent on Russian gas. So you could imagine what it means in the short term. Even for the scenario of electricity production and consumption. If one important. One critical supplier is cut off. How this is going to affect not just the country, Austria, but of course the neighboring countries. Because in the moment where we are going to have a significant crisis. There will be also the expectation that other neighboring countries come to the risk.

TN: Okay, so there’s a lot to dive into here and I wish we had about 3 hours with you guys, but I guess the question that comes to mind for me is as you talk about decarbonization and as you talk about blackouts,

does that also mean deindustrialization of parts of Europe over, say, the medium term to accommodate the energy crisis? 

AM: Of course. That’s a simple answer. Never mind just the simple part of the electrical output being lower, but the cost being exponentially higher. You’re not going to sit there and build an item that’s 300% more to create than you can actually sell. It just doesn’t work like that.

I mean, even the German Economic Minister came out with an absolutely astonishing comment saying some companies might stop making things and they’ll be not really insolvent, but it’s just only for a short time. Well, if you stop making things and stop producing money, you’re going to solve it and you’re going to be awarded the state.

So the European countries are going to have to flood the economy with money, whether it be the energy companies or the manufacturing companies, that they don’t go under. 

TN: And I could see that for a transition period. But does this mean that let’s say over three to five years or longer, kind of France becomes the industrial heartland of Europe because they have the energy supply with nuclear? Will France be the place where, say, German or Austrian or other manufacturing migrates to to have affordable and continuous electric supplies?

AM: Yeah, I think so. And I’ll push it over to Velina because she’s more of an expert of it. But from my perspective, yeah, of course, you would go to a grid system that’s more stable and cheaper. That’s going to cause problems within the European Union, because other countries are not going to like this. They’re not going to like their corporations flying over, moving over to France. It’s the way the game goes.

VT: Maybe just to add something to the picture. First and foremost, I think that I agree with what Albert said. But then again, we have to think of the complex political box that is the European Union decision making, because it’s not just about the states. We have also European institutions. They’re going to pump a lot of liquidity. If you take a look at all these programs that have been announced by the European Union, by the European institutions, we talk about trillions of Euros that are going to be invested in the European recovery. 

On the upside of the story, we see that there is a readiness, political will to do whatever is necessary decision-making, to use another famous quote from another famous political figure in the European political decision making. That means and that is my anticipation that is what’s going to happen. We are going to see trillions of Euros being pumped into the European states, into European industries, and into European institutions within the states to save whatever possible.

Then again, we are going to witness, of course, a situation in which, still fossil fuels will be on the table. That is the story and I think that politicians should be honest with citizens. We are going to see a lot of LNG coming. 

The problem once again is infrastructure, interconnectors. So that kind of things are going to be built in the next three to five years. A country like Germany doesn’t have even a single LNG terminal. But now they are planning to build three of them.

So this kind of very awkward pipeline system, gas pipeline system going from east to the west that has been built over decades is going to be useless as we see and is going to be replaced. This is how well economic mindset works, right?

So in a sense it’s going to be not only nuclear, just to answer the question, it’s not going to be only about France. If the industrial heart of Europe is destroyed, that is obviously Germany.  I just don’t see, because Germany is trade partner number one of all member states. So it’s going to have ripple effects for all of them if Germany is crushed, if Germany collapses. So I argue that it’s going to be both. It’s going to be nuclear, it’s going to be renewables, but it’s going to be also a lot about fossil fuels in the next three to five years.

TN: Okay, that’s interesting guys, we could dive into this for an hour and I would love to do it, but let’s move on to strong US dollar and the impact on Europe. And I’ve got a chart up showing our Complete Intelligence forecast for EURUSD and it shows a continuing deterioration of the value of the Euro over the next six months.

So we’ve seen devaluation of the euro. We’ve also seen the ECB come out with a 75 basis point rise this week. So what do we expect? Given the headwinds that Europe is facing and say high commodity and energy prices that are largely dominated in US dollars, what do we expect?

First of all, what does Europe kind of generally think about a strong US dollar? How is that playing and how do we expect Europe to react over time to compete and to be able to afford some of these factor inputs both for manufacturing and for energy?

AM: I think Tony, it’s a double-edged sword for Europe. On one hand, lower euro helps their exports. I don’t know how much exports are actually going out right now, but it does help the exports.

On the other hand, high dollar is creating inflationary problems for the Europeans and on top of that, they have to service any kind of dollar debt. It’s a problem. I think it’s a manageable problem for the Europeans right now. I think they can deal with the dollar at 110, 112, maybe 115 better than any other emerging markets can absolutely take the dollar that high. But for right now the game is to hit inflation globally and they’re a key player in that component with the Fed working tangent.

So right now, I don’t think it’s a dire problem, but it’s certainly something that needs to be addressed in the coming six months. 

TN: Great. Velina, what’s the feeling on the ground? Do European policymakers kind of resent a strong dollar? 

VT: Not really, and I completely agree with Albert. I think that the European Union countries, these are the 27, are well equipped to handle this compared to many other fragile economies all over the world. And I argue also that the ECB is going to continue with its copy paste policy, basically following what the Federal Reserve is doing, just to tackle the inflation and to really limit the demand as much as possible in the short term. And in that sense, I just don’t see a real kind of panic mode, to be honest with you.

On the side of political decision makers and just to add probably a final sentence. Probably a little bit of cynical one. But I still argue that the ECB fills or sees itself on the safe side because they know that the Federal Reserve will always offer the swap lines as a last resort just to keep the system afloat.

AM: Right? Yeah, they do have swap. Not only does the Fed have swap lines, but even US banks to key European banks have swap lines. So they don’t have to technically report it. But the United States is in no way in the mood to allow Europe to fail. They are our key allies, and they’re a buffer for the Russians and the Chinese. So they will be suffering, but they will not fail.

VT: I think this is a good point that Albert made. I think this is a critical point because in a bifurcated global financial system, if we refer to the last statements of the Russian President Putin in Vladivostok, where he explicitly pointed to this scenario, bifurcating the global financial system and creating two alternative networks based on our, let’s say, euro dollar system against the system of Chinese traded or Russian traded currency or whatever third country you want to take as an example that is allying or siding with them.

So I think that even looking from this scenario, you see that there is readiness, political will. Wherever there is a will, there is a way, I would say. 

TN: Very good. Okay, let’s move on to kind of the US. Russia, India Triangle and Russian petroleum exports to India. So if we look at Russian seaborne crude exports, India is taking about half of Russia’s seaborne crude exports right now, and China is taking the other half. There are some others, but for the most part, India and China are splitting that.

And as we look at the G7 proposed price cap, we’ve had India’s petroleum minister come out a couple of days ago saying, we will buy oil from Russia, and we will buy from wherever we want. He said this in a CNBC interview a couple of days ago, and he’s saying,

“I have a moral duty to my customer.” So he is focused on Indian citizens. India has a very independent foreign policy, and they’re showing that. So that’s creating some tension between the US and India.

So what do you think is going to happen there? How does that play out? 

AM: This is nothing new. The Obama administration had a disdain for Modi in India over multiple issues, and this is carried over into the Biden administration. The Biden administration is just not realistic. I don’t know what they’re thinking about trying to isolate India and pressure them into joining this anti-Russian crusade because they need the Russians as a counterbalance towards China. They need the Russians there, they need, their energy. And there’s a counterbalance to the US, to be honest, right?

Well, I mean, of course. They have their own national interest in ours. Every nation, every nation on earth cares about their voters and their citizens before anything else. And that’s what foreign policy is based on, is the needs of the nation. And the Indians are doing exactly what they need to do. They need to solidify their energy imports and their exports and have their economy stable. And I don’t blame them one bit.

I think this is all about the United States overreaching at the moment. And it’s just silly to me. 

TN: Velina? 

VT: I absolutely agree with Albert, and I will just add the following several points. First point, fertilizers, arm sales, cashmere. These are the three pillars, actually, of India-Russia relationship. So long as no other external actors, including the United States, is able and willing to replace Russia on these three topics, I just don’t see how the Indian foreign policy position is going to move away from it.

Second, this is not the whole picture, of course. Right now, the oil supply is increasing, but who has been financing the war in Ukraine? It has been solely the majority of European powers. The majority of oil and gas profits for more than six months have been actually due to the dependence of Europe on Russian supply. 

Okay, so what was miscalculated right from the beginning was actually the international isolation of Russia. This is not going to happen.

As also Albert pointed out, India is going to pursue its own interests. If you have to feed 1.3 billion people, and if you are projected to become the Third World economic power in this or next decade, and you have already overtaken UK as economy number five, I think that you are going to look after your own interests. This is my reading of the Indian position.

And final point, if you are getting a discount from the Russians, why would you actually agree on oil price cap? And this is what is going to happen. The Russian oil, I’m sorry to be so cynical, but the Russian oil is going to find the markets, the gray markets, the black markets, the one way or the other. It was an important gesture coming from the G7. But like I said, the G7 miscalculated in the sense that international isolation of Russia for 2022 is not possible. And this is what is going to happen. 

AM: Yeah, I made this point last time I talked to Tony about it. The United States, the Biden administration specifically tried to put a foot on the Russians throat is just back far. You already won. Having them defeated from taking Kiev and losing so many soldiers in Ukraine, there was no need to push the envelope and put yourself in a situation where Russia can use their commodities as an asymmetric weapon against the west, which they’re doing fantastically right now. It’s just miscalculated all over the place.

TN: Yeah. So there are two things that I come away from this. First of all, the US couldn’t necessarily keep Iran from selling oil internationally or Iraq or anybody else. So how could they keep Russia from selling oil? It’s just not possible.

AM: No, it’s not. We have ship to ship transfers. You have ports like Freeport, Bahamas, where they mix Venezuelan oil with whatever. The documents are easy to get.

TN: Naive, impossible policy. Right. It’s simply for the optics of it,

not necessarily for the reality of it.

AM: Well, these are academics that don’t really understand real politics until the prices. 

VT: Let me give you one final example because you made a very good point. How do you think 4300 km border between China and Russia is going to be observed if the Chinese are actually not sending chips or any technologies or whatever you like with the Russians right now?

So that is the whole point that in the real world, of course, we have this gray area where we cannot verify, but that means that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence and we should really be mindful of the real motives and interests of the main actors.

So what we are saying with Albert does not mean that we are normatively agreeing with these policies, but we are just pointing to realities the way they are.

TN: Yeah, of course. And I’m going to make one last comment and close out with this. It’s interesting to me how Russia has inserted itself in between the India China relationship and it’s a fantastically strategic position to be in. And I think that’s one benefit that Russia has come out with over the past, say, nine months of this conflict is they’ve become an interlocutor for that relationship.

So guys, thank you so much for your time today. Thank you so much for your thoughts on this. 

We could talk for hours on this and I appreciate this and I look forward to the comments that people are going to bring to this because I’m sure there’s going to be a lot of discussion on this. So thanks very much and have a great weekend.

Learn more about CI Futures here: https://completeintel.com/2022Promo

This week we’ve seen a lot around dollar hitting almost 110. We’ve seen a lot in the US market downturn. There’s a lot of speculation around the Fed. But we’re really focusing on Europe this week.

Key themes:

1. European Natgas Stock vs Flow

2. Russian Oil Price Cap Fallout

3. Europe’s Food and Fertilizer Fallout

4. What’s ahead for next week?

This is the 32nd episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd

Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon/

Sam: https://twitter.com/samuelrines

Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Listen on Spotify

https://open.spotify.com/episode/0l16oeOH2eNrWwTNgvbqTM?si=3c6b248be066416e

Time Stamps

0:00 Start

1:51 European natgas: stocks VS flows

8:26 What to expect in manufacturing in Europe

9:26 Difficult environment for the German Finance Ministry?

10:27 Fertilizer fallout and impacts on Europe’s food supply

14:19 Is Europe getting relief soon, or will this crisis continue to 2024?

15:33 Russian oil price cap: is it going to come about?

19:12 What’s to stop countries from indirectly buying Russian crude?

22:00 What’s for the week ahead?

Transcript

Tony Nash: Hi, and welcome to The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. Today we’re joined by Sam Rines, Tracy Shuchart and Albert Marko. We’re going through the events this week and looking toward next week.

Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to like and subscribe. Please add your comments. We’re on top of the comments. We come back pretty quickly. We really want your engagement, so add those comments in.

Also we have a promo right now on our subscription product, CI Futures. That promo ends in two weeks. So you get forecast for about 3000 items. About 900 of those are renewed every week. We show you the forecast, the error rates, all sorts of stuff about all of these different assets, global assets. So please check it out. That runs out in mid September.

So this week we’ve seen a lot around dollar hitting almost 110. We’ve seen a lot in US market downturn. There’s, a lot of speculation around the Fed. But we’re really focusing on Europe this week.

The key themes this week are really around European natgas stock versus flows. Russian oil price caps and the fallout that has come with that. Food and fertilizer in Europe. And then we’ll look to the week ahead. So I think we’ll look at some non Europe activities for the week ahead.

First for European natgas, Sam Rines in his newsletter came out with some really interesting points around natural gas stocks and flows. You can see the chart on the screen. Sam, can you talk us through kind of what’s happening in storage for natural in Europe and what we should be looking for as winter approaches?

Sam Rines: Yeah, sure. So you get this really interesting dynamic where everybody talks about the stock but very few people talk about the flow. So talking about the stocks of that gas in Europe is a really interesting one. Yeah, you’ve got stocks building up pretty quickly, particularly in Germany, sitting north of 82% overall for European stocks in general, north of 80%.

So it’s good, right? Stocks seem to be well ahead of where you would anticipate. Germany has a 95 target for November. They might actually reach it even with the shutdown of Ms one, Nordstream One. It’s actually not that big of a deal incrementally to Germany in particular. You go from about call it a 3.2 kilowatt hour type pump into Germany to about a three.

You didn’t really lose that much. I mean, it was pretty much anticipated anyway. So if they keep it off

for longer, whatever. You don’t have significant usage coming through at the moment for natural gas.

It’s a time where you can actually afford to not have those significant closing. They’ll probably still have some stock bill that will just be slower.

So overall, I think it’s a lot of headlines that a lot of it’s already priced in. If you were looking at the expectations of complete and utter frozen winter, you’re pretty much not looking at that assuming that Norway and Belgium continue to put their flows through to Germany at the current rate.

So overall, you’re actually sitting on a decent call it stock level. Right? That’s fine. And as long as you continue to have the flows from call it Northern Europe, you should be okay for the winter. You’re not going to be great. It’s going to be expensive, and it’s going to suck. But relative to the expectation of Europe’s going to freeze this winter,

I think that might actually be a little bit of an overblown one, and you might begin to have a significant blowback on that. And you’ve seen significant declines in things like electricity pricing ahead, which is a ridiculous contract anyway. And Dutch TTF, the net gas contract you’ve seen collapse this week, even with the shutdown of Nordstream.

So I think a little bit of the froth, a little bit of that angst is beginning to come out of the market, and you might actually have a positive surprise relative to expectations in Europe.

TN: So Dutch TTF peaked on Tuesday or something, right? It was early in the week, right?

SR: Correct.

TN: And Tracy, what are you seeing with that? Do you expect us to hit back up to those peaks, and do you think that was kind of a one time hit? And what Sam saying about storage is really kind of starting to take hold.

Tracy Shuchart: I think it really depends over the long run and how slow go. I totally agree with Sam here. Right now, for winter, Europe is pretty much okay, not great, as he said, but I think given if we don’t see increased flows, that storage would drain significantly by February. So we really have to keep an eye on flows from other countries, particularly in the United States, in the Middle East, and to see how those flows go. So I think it’s too early to be completely doom and gloom, but that is something we need to be cognizant of, because that storage can only last until February.

TN: Right. And for those people who aren’t in Northern Europe, northern European winter really stays cold, really until like, April, right. It’s not something that February comes and goes and it’s spring and everything’s great. You still have cold temperatures in Northern Europe until probably April or so. Is that about right?

TS: Yeah, absolutely. Anecdotally, if you’re been on Twitter, you see a lot of people starting to buy wood. The big thing on the European sites is to post how much wood you collected before this winter. So people are sourcing. People are expecting energy prices to be high and doing whatever they can personally, to kind of lower the prices. Because you have to understand, when you’re talking about European power prices, it’s not just your solid power price. They have that almost all of their taxes on top is on top of what they actually would be paying, which is outrageous carbon, et cetera.

TN: And so I just want to go back to one point in Sam’s chart as well. I think sam, you said the storage is about 82% full or something and they’re targeting 95%, but we’re ahead in 2022 from where we were in 2021, is that right?

SR: Yeah, that is correct.

TN: Okay, so the doom and gloom that we’re hearing again, we have inflation, we definitely have shortages, but in terms of storage, we’re ahead of where we were. And we don’t expect like a mass extinction event in northern Europe because of heating or whatever, right?

SR: Correct. I think that is a good base case. That’s good for everything. No mass extinction is low bar, but yes, that’s right. 

TN: Exactly. Okay, very good. Do you have anything to add on this?

Albert Marko: I’m on middle of the road here. I do agree with Sam that they’ll be okay so long as they’re okay with no manufacturing, no growth in their economy, and so on and so forth. I mean, if they tried to kick things up and the demand starts to rise, I don’t think it will be okay. I don’t think that the Russians are going to play ball, especially when they start talking about these price caps on Russian oil and gas. It’s one of those things where economically, I can understand where Sam is coming from.

Politically, I’m inclined to say that Europeans are going to screw up and just agitate the Russians. And then you start getting into this back and forth. That economic trade and price.

TN: Let’s set the price cap aside for a minute. But when you say no manufacturing, so we’ve seen some manufacturing dial back and some facilities slow down and shutter. Is that expected to continue or do we expect that to ramp back up?

AM: I expect it to completely be just stalled for the entire winter. I just think the energy prices are so astronomically high that it’s just not economical for companies to manufacture anything.

TN: Okay, so if you’re sourcing things in Germany, then you should expect supply chain issues for the next five or so months. Is that fair to say?

AM: At least six months. And this is why I keep saying that this inflation doom loop keeps recurring because as the demand rises, there’s not enough supply and then you get back into an inflationary event. What’s the inflation rate in the UK right now? Like 20% reported. 20%? And in Germany, I think it’s like 19% and rising. It doesn’t stop.

TN: And PPI is in the 30s or something. Just to play this out, I wouldn’t have a whole lot of time to cover this, but if private sector is shutting down, even parts of it, then government spending has to kick up. And if government spending is kicking up and we have an ECB that’s tightening, that’s a difficult environment for the German Finance Ministry, right? Or is it no big deal then?

SR: No, I would completely disagree. I mean, Germany is one of the few countries in the world that has they could basically print their GDP and they’d still be perfectly fine on an ability to pay basis. They spent, like, three years getting paid to have debt.

TN: So very good, because, look, nobody wants Germany to suffer, right? And if government spending

has to kick up, then great. If they’re not going to suffer as a government to be able to do that, then that’s even more fantastic, because with ECB tightening, it could create some difficult trade offs for some countries in the region, of course.

So let’s take this and park it and let’s move on to fertilizer, because, of course, that’s related to natural gas.

And we have some there’s a recent Bloomberg story about Europe’s deepening fertilizer crunch. 70% of fertilizer production is halted. And then we have a chart showing the price of nitrogen fertilizer in Germany. Obviously, it looks pretty extreme. Can we cover that, Albert, and look at the impacts of fertilizer and how that’s going to hit food going into spring or summer of next year?

AM: Oh, yeah, the fertilizer, specifically what you’re talking about, nitrogen based ones, are relying on natural gas. Natural gas prices just keep on spiking over there. And again, we can continue this whole discussion about inflationary, commodity prices, but food is a big problem. They shut down their potash.

On top of that, the farmers, they’re notorious penny pinchers, whether it’s the United States, whether it’s Europe, so on and so forth. But they’re going to have to make up the nutrients for the soil in the spring of 2023 and most likely into 2024, they can’t deprive the land of nutrients.

So, of course, they’re going to have to have another round of demand for fertilizer. I don’t know about the night gas based ones, but potash certainly will have a surge.

That’s why I’ve always on Twitter have been big on Mosaic being the 800 pound gorilla outside of Morocco’s. OCP, but OPC, I think it is. But that’s not a tradable stock mosaic fertilizer. I’m very bullish on that. That’s going to relate to bigger increases in food prices, specifically in the UK.

TN: What crops in Europe would be most impacted by this?

AM: Wheat. Most likely wheat.

TN: Yeah. Okay. And where does Germany traditionally, where does it source most of its fertilizer? Is it from Russia?

AM: I believe they get most of their stuff from Belarus originally. And I know that they have potash fertilizer plants inside of Germany itself, but I’m not sure how. I don’t know the exact numbers on the importance of what they do for a fertilizer, but it’s certainly a problem specifically for Germany. Of course it’s a problem for France. It’s even bigger problem because they’re a big food producer.

TN: Okay, Tracy, you’ve said a lot about fertilizer in the past. What are your thoughts on this? Does it just get even more intense or do we see some relief on the horizon?

TS: Well, I think it does get a little bit more intensive when we just saw And, Norway’s largest fertilizer company, all kind of curve back production in various countries wherever their plants are concerned. So it’s definitely a concern. 100% agree with Albert. Going into next year is going to be a very big problem. I mean, everybody’s harvesting right now. Everything’s fine. We’ve seen big pullback in those prices. But going forward, in particular next year, we’re going to have a problem.

AM: And a lot of that, Tracy, has to do with the national governments are going to look out for their national interests, their own farmers, so that although the imports will drop, so the exports will drop and they’ll just keep it closed within their own nation, so they can feed their own people.

TN: Fertilizer nationalism.

AM: Well, it’s just the same thing with oil. I mean, the countries are not export more than they can handle.

Yeah.

TN: Okay, so sounds pretty dire, but do we see any relief next year? Or, like you said, is it going to go into 24, or does it all depend on Russia?

AM: I think it depends on Russia whether the Europeans and the United States come to their senses and stop trying to put their foot on the throat of the Russians. You’re hampering your own economic growth, and they’re sitting there talking about, oh, we’re going to get away from fossil fuels and do this whole new climate thing. That’s just not realistic. And I don’t think they just haven’t come to grips with that yet.

TN: I think it’s a time frame thing. Right? I mean, it’s going to take some time, and I think there’s a hybrid mix in the interim that I think we’re trying to rush.

AM: Well, that’s the point. They’re trying to rush things. When you rush things, your own people are going to suffer economically and so on and so forth. It’s just not politically. They just can’t swallow it. Some of the voters don’t swallow that. Sort of stuff. 

TN: And things break. Like Californians can’t charge their electric cars. Right. These are weird times.

Okay, great. Thanks, guys.

And then on the oil price cap, we had about this week, former Russian President Good about this week, saying that Russia just won’t deal with people who subscribe to the price cap.

And then we had Xavier Blossom, Bloomberg tweet about it, saying that he and his friends are going to agree to a price cap on beer at their local pub and that the guys at the pub don’t agree with it, which is a nice analogy, I guess.

Tracy, what are you seeing on the price cap? Is it actually going to come about?

TS: First, they just announced that they’ve been talking about this for months. Let me give a little bit of background. And they just now say there’s going to be three different kind of price caps, one for crude and two for refined products.

However, if you look at the actual G7 statement that was out today, they were pretty vague on it. Basically, they said, we invite all countries to provide input on the price cap design and to implement this important measure. So in other words, they’ve decided they’re going to do this, but not exactly holiday.

TN: It’s going to be 2030 before they come to an agreement on.

TS: it’s because. They’Re asking all their stakeholders to join in this. And so what I see as the problems with this right now is that there are four specific problems. One, it’s not really enforceable outside of G Seven countries if people don’t sign up for this. Two, Russia already said, again repeating you, that they won’t sell to countries that enact price caps. Three, part of this is the maritime insurance on vessels carrying Russian oil India is already providing safety and notification through IRGC class.

So by Dubai, subsidiary of the Russian shipping group. So I hope I pronounced that right. But anyway, they’ve already kind of gotten their way around this. And four, they’re also thinking about creating their own benchmark.

So right now, Russian crude oil is expressed as a discount to Brent because rent is the benchmark price. They already have an oil trading platform in place via RTS and MYsix. So they could build out this platform, which they’ve been talking about, and go through near Mir, which is basically their version of Swift, and completely by past that and just let market forces work.

I think this price cap is still way off from seeing the light of day. But this actually could turn out much more bullish because this price cap overlooks how Russia could influence global markets.

If they wanted to, they could opt to cut off the EU and NATO, not just G7. G Seven members shut production and raise global crude oil prices through the roof because they would take barrels off the market there by hurting the G7 nation.

I’m not saying that would happen. I’m just saying that’s within the realm of two box. And it’s not surprising after we just saw today, as soon as an oil price cap was announced as a plan, suddenly we just saw gas problem with Nordstream one, therefore I’m off of national gas.

TN: So what’s to stop, let’s say, a European country that signs onto a price cap from buying, let’s say, Russian crude that is sent to Chinese, say ownership and then resold to say, I don’t know, Germany. I mean, that type of circumvention is already happening, right?

TS: No, you can definitely do that. What we’re really seeing now is that kind of circumvention is happening in the product market. So it’s very easy for, say, India to buy Russian crude oil, refine it until it’s anywhere else because it’s very hard to track where those barrels really came from. It’s easier to track a resale. Right, if that makes sense.

TN: Sure it does. But they put in a barrel of, say, Emirati crude with a million barrels of Russian crude and then they label it Emirati crude. Right? Something like that.

TS: Yeah. If they both have the same API level, depends. You could mix them. If they both were the same exact API level, then you could mix them. It’s kind of different than, say, the natural gas market. Yeah.

AM: The Iranians do this with the Iraqi oil and bozzar. Often they mix it and label it As Iraqi 

TS: because they share oil fields. I mean, Albert and I have been talking about this for years now.

AM: Years.

TN: Let’s be honest, the rules apply to the people who abide by the rules. Right. And so even if these price caps are put in place, there will be circumvention in a big way, of course, at least a refined product, if not crude product. And so a lot of it’s for sure. Is that fair to say?

AM: Of course, yeah. A lot of it is for show. This is a political thing right now for scapegoating Russia

for inflation problems. Now they’re just snowballing things and saying Russia’s gas is the problem

 for inflation, Russia’s oil is the inflation problem, and other caps. But like I said earlier, and even just Tracy reaffirmed it’s like the moment you mentioned price caps against Russia, Moscow finds an issue, whether it’s gas, prom leak or Belarus problems, or Algeria has problems with Wagner. They create these issues all the time.

TN: Of course, anytime there are sanctions on a country, right. These things happen. Okay, very good. Thank you, guys. We spent a lot of time talking about Europe. So let’s move on to the week ahead and

what we expect to happen the week ahead.

We saw some really interesting action in markets, and last week we talked about how Palo speech, we really should have been a surprise to no one, but markets seem to kind of take it on the chin this week, acting shocked that he repeated himself again. So what do we expect going into next week? Do we expect things to kind of moderate a little bit or do we at least in equity markets, do we still expect some downward movement and also, say energy markets? We saw crude down, I think at 86 or something.

Tracy, do you expect, say, energy markets to continue to fall next week?

TS: What I would really look at, and what I’m looking at more, instead of looking at just reprice, which seems highly manipulated right now, especially going into midterms, not suggesting anything, but I think what I would start looking at is in like second and third month spreads or fourth month spreads. Right. So you really want to be looking, I think, just a couple of months down that curve a little bit. And if you start seeing because those curves are still kind of telling us that the market is very tight and curves, you can’t really manipulate as much as you can somewhat of the front line. So I think that’s where you should be looking at.  I think we’ll really get a better grasp on these markets and to see what front market is next week is OPEC meeting, right. So they were talking about cuts, right, over the last couple of weeks. That’s right. That’s all. I will be on that. That’s on the fifth.

TN: And SPR keeps going until October. So we’re only looking at November,December before we’ll see some upward pressure on prices. At least a stand up pressure.

TS: Yeah, exactly. And depending on what OPEC says, we could see an initial pull back. The general consensus is they’re not going to do anything in September. However, OPEC has been known

to give us some surprises. So just keep that in mind.

TN: That’s good all right. Very good. Sam, what are you looking for for next week?

SR: Next week I’m looking at the ECB. I want to hear how hawkish they are and how quick they’re going to go and what type of language they’re using. They’re still in the QE boat, right? They’re still buying Italy, they’re still buying Spain, they’re still buying a bunch of the southern debt periphery type debt.

So I want to hear what they’re saying, how they’re saying it, and just how call it, quote, unquote, inflation-oriented. They are. They probably should be particularly versus the bank of England, who is very hawkish and likely to continue to, one, explore actually outright sales from their asset purchases to shrink their balance sheet and how quickly the relative moves are there.

I think that can create some fireworks, particularly called the Euro pound type crossed I think that could be really interesting and cross asset class could be.

TN: Do you think you should be able to surprise hawkish?

SR: Yes.

TN: You do? Okay, interesting. That would be very interesting to see. Wow. Okay. And so you think the Euro recovers a little bit on that?

SR: I think it knee jerks, yes. But the question is how long does that last? Right. That, I think, is a much more important question than the initial knee jerk. And I think over time, it would be a fade the news move.

TN: Okay, very interesting. Okay, very good. Thanks for that, Albert, close this out. What do you see for next week?

AM: The big boys come back to play from vacation. That’s right, they do. I think they’re going to start holding the market a little bit more accountable for all this bad data. And I think earnings were just atrocious when you look at what inflation was. I’m actually going to be watching though

China as we get closer to the CCP, the Party meeting, I think it’s October 16, I think XI might start announcing many stimulus packages in certain sectors. So I want to see if those materialize and what that does with commodities that are attached to them.

TN: Okay. I just want to say, with regard to the Party meeting in November, if anybody talks about reading tea leaves or any of that garbage, you’re banned immediately. Okay.

So we’re not going to imply, like, cultural mysteriousness on Chinese political processes. It’s just they’re a bureaucracy like everyone else. They make decisions like everyone else. They’re no more or less mysterious than anyone else. So I would say that for the people watching, because the people watching are going to see a lot of kind of China experts or whatever China watchers talked about how mysterious the CCP is and a lot of question marks. A lot of them are Fed talking points from the CCP spin machine. So they’re not mysterious, they’re a bureaucracy. They’re boring, just like every other country.

AM: Yeah. And the Party is I believe that Congress is October 16, not November. Yeah. So it’s closer than people realize. It’s only 30 days away, but China is going to have to probably stimulate some sectors associated with whoever is in line with the party leadership to keep them happy. So that’s what I’ll be watching next week.

TN: Yes. Very good, guys. Thank you so much. Looking forward to have a great holiday weekend, and I look forward to seeing you next week. Thank you very much.

Learn more about CI Futures here: https://completeintel.com/2022Promo

Crude and energy are on everybody’s minds, and we spent a lot of the Week Ahead parsing the details. Saudi Arabia came out with some comments about restricting their crude supplies to global markets, and we also have a detailed discussion on the SPR release in the US – when will it end, how will that impact crude prices, etc. 

We also discussed Jackson Hole drama and the conclusions of Powell’s latest speech. Powell really didn’t say anything new, so why are equity markets reacting so dramatically?

And will we finally get some stimulus from China’s government? We’ve seen movement in tech stocks and some talks of the stimulus release, but we expect more after the US election. 

Key themes

1. Crude oil supply: Saudi/UAE cuts vs SPR

2. Jackson Hole Drama

3. China Stimulus (Finally?)

4. What’s ahead for next week?

This is the 31st episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd

Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon/

Sam: https://twitter.com/samuelrines

Josh: https://twitter.com/Josh_Young_1

Listen on Spotify:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/1lRWv8qkvohOqthK2CB2y3?si=3d4ec4d318e146c6

Transcript

Tony Nash: Hi, and welcome to The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. This week, we’re joined by Josh Young for the first time. So I want to thank Josh a lot for taking the time to join us. We’ve got Albert Marko and Samuel Rines. We’re lucky to have these three really valuable guests.

Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to like and subscribe to this YouTube channel. You’ll get reminded every week. Give us comments on the show. We always look at the comments. We always respond to the comments. So thanks for taking the time to do that.

We also have a promo for our product, CI Futures. That product is $50 a month right now. You can go month to month with it, try it out. We cover about 900 assets with weekly forecasts, and we do about 2000 economic variables with monthly forecasts. So check it out. We’re transparent. We disclose our error rates for every month. So it’s good information.

We have a couple of key items this week. First is the crude oil supply. We had Saudi Arabia come out with some comments about restricting their supply. We also have some information on the SPR release in the US. So we’re going to ask Josh to leave the discussion on that. 

Obviously, Jackson Hole drama. We’re probably the only people not leading the Jackson Hole today. But there are some meaningful things happening. There are some things happening that are not meaningful, and Sam will talk us through that. 

And then when we finally get some China stimulus, I think that’s a real question and Albert will lead us on that.

So Josh, thanks again for joining us. You put out a tweet earlier today about the UAE supporting the Saudi comments on supply restrictions.

Can you talk us through that and help us understand why did that happen and why is that important?

Josh Young: So the UAE is supporting what the Saudis and other OPEC members are doing in terms

of threatening to cut production based on the combination of lower price, as well as their observation that there may be some paper market price manipulation and disconnect from what they’re seeing as the largest sort of combined suppliers in the oil market. And it’s particularly important that the UAE did this because what we saw at Bison was that most of the OPEC members were actually producing their maximum production capacity. And when you produce that maximum, the fields aren’t designed for that. It’s sort of like driving with your foot all the way down on the gas 100% of the time. You’ll break your car and you’ll crash.

And so a lot of these fields and their processing facilities, they’re just not designed to run at this. It’s a theoretical capacity that’s supposed to run for a week, a month, three months, not how they’ve been running it. And so there’s a lot of pressure on a lot of fields in many of the OPEC countries to actually reduce production slightly, so it’s not a surprise.

And we forecast that there would be some discussion of this given the high run rate versus their spare capacity. UAE in particular does have some remaining spare capacity, so what we’re seeing is cohesion within OPEC along with supply exhaustion of the other OPEC members. So it’s actually a pretty big thing, and I don’t think people are really picking up on it too much. Although maybe it’s why oils flat up a little.

TN: With the market down a lot today. Is this something that will start small incrementally and then it will accelerate? Meaning will they cut off a little bit of supply and then over time, maybe they take some fields down for maintenance or something like that, and then you start to see bigger chunks? Is that a possible scenario?

JY: Yeah. Honestly, I don’t know exactly what the path will be. I just know that they see it. We were joking before the show that, hey, maybe they’re following my Twitter feed and a few other people’s been observing these problems with the oil market and sort of weird trading patterns versus very strong physical demand and sort of very strong indicators.

And you see Saudi has a very high price relative to their benchmarks. Right. Their poster price, especially Asia, has been very high and usually that’s associated with price strength, and instead we’ve seen price weakness. So I think they’re very frustrated by that, but they may wait for some other things. So oil prices to fall a little more or some other sort of signal, maybe some small amount of demand destruction to the extent that happens. I think it’s a little hard, just given the Saudi relationship  with the US and their sort of hope to maintain a lot of their alliance and their alignment with the west. 

So I think they need sort of an additional catalyst. That being said, once they do it, they might… I don’t know if they start small and then go big, or they might just go big. They might just say, hey, we’re cutting by a million barrels a day. We increased by four over the last year and a half, and we’re fully supportive of the market. We might go a lot bigger if necessary, and there’s a disconnect and we’re going to support it.

TN: Okay, so how much of this is related to the SPR release? Is the SPR release having such an impact on prices that the Saudis are kind of fed up with it, or are there other factors?

JY: I actually don’t think it’s related to the SPR release almost at all. It does look like it’s a little related to some of the job owning around a potential agreement with Iran. And there’s a lot of disagreement in terms of how much oil production could come on if Iran came to an agreement with the west and sort of restarted. JCPOA. I’m in the camp that there’s not a lot left to produce and to export. You can see the amount is getting exported to India and various other countries. It’s up a lot from the last time this was floated, six or seven months ago. So whatever that capacity was for Iran to export, it’s less.

But I think it’s partly tied to that because Iran is a regional foe of Saudi Arabia and UAE and several other OPEC countries. So I think it’s a little bit of that. And I think it’s a lot related to the paper market trading patterns and just this really big weird disconnect where you see consumption fine and you see price down and it’s probably messing up your CI Futures forecasting a little because you’re probably tracking the consumption and the consumption is fine and the price is down. And it’s like. Okay. The inventories are down. This is weird. Again, excluding SPR, when the SPR stops releasing, obviously you’d expect price to recover substantially absent a million barrels a day of demand structure.

TN: Is that what you expect when the SPR release is done, that’s late October or something, right, do you expect prices to rise notably? 

JY: Yeah. And I think like, the EIA forecast for shale production growth and sort of overall US oil production is just totally off base. They haven’t reset it, even though I think they had like a million barrels a day or something forecast for growth. And I think we’re at sort of 300,000 barrels a day so far this year and pretty flat. And the rig count is not up that much, and the frac stack count is definitely not up enough. So I think there’s sort of this disconnect. 

There also in terms of this mark to model from a production perspective versus what’s actually happening in the field.  And then you look at it’s not hard to see who the big producers are on the public side and then which ones had forecast growth and how much they’re actually achieving. 

It’s really hard to reconcile their forecast for production growth versus what’s actually happening. And we’re really well situated for this because we spend most of our time we talk a lot about macro, we spend most of our time just like looking at individual companies and evaluating them and evaluating their securities. And so I think it’s part of why we’ve had such a powerful voice from a macro perspective, because we’re spending most of our time talking to these companies, looking at the rigs, looking at other services, figuring out the bottlenecks, and looking at some of the local stuff.

And when you do that and you step back and say, these numbers don’t make sense, and the companies are not tracking anywhere close to that. So back to SPR, that matters a lot because we’re not achieving the production that is being forecast. And it seems like a lot of market participants, or at least prognosticators, are just accepting as a given. That means that at whatever point… I’m not saying that the SPR release stops in October. They may continue it, but at whatever point, there is a finite amount of oil there. And we’re hitting tank bottom on some of those caverns that are releasing oil. At some point we just run out or we stop releasing and whatever that point is, absent significant demand destruction in a very deep recession, I think we see a lot higher oil prices.

TN: So in terms of the SPR release, you said, you talk about being empty, this sort of thing. How much do you think are you still thinking kind of October? Are you thinking they’re going to continue, but it would kind of have to trickle out, not at the same rate they had been releasing to date. Right? Because they are short on supply in the SPR.

JY: Yeah, I don’t think it has to trickle out. I think they could produce pretty hard for another month or so, and then it starts becoming more of an issue. But as you get down to it, looks like the numbers around 20% or so for any of the individual storage facilities, and for some of them, it might be a little higher, some of it might be a little lower. You start having issues with contamination as well as just physical deliverability, actually extracting it out. 

And I think people take the numbers a little too seriously. And it’s very weird because no one trusts the government about certain things and then other things they just blindly say, oh yeah, it’s right. It’s from, okay, try to reconcile that.

And I think when you talk to engineers and some of the people that have worked on these facilities, their observation is that it’s reasonable to expect less deliverability. But there are enough of the facilities that aren’t drawn down enough that they should be able to supply. I don’t think we’re really hitting deliverability issues yet, but I think we’re likely to start to hit them, let’s say over the next month or so.

TN: Okay. So kind of when we take what you’re talking about and we look at, say, the potential impact of crude prices and refined product prices on inflation and energy prices generally on inflation, seems to me that you’re implying that towards the end of the year we could see those prices rise fairly quickly. Is that fair to say?

JY: It is. But at the same time, gasoline prices are still down a lot. These will start to tick back up the gasoline, which is a big consumer factor, as well as it gets felt through a number of different aspects of the economy. So at least for now, that’s not so much of a risk. But yeah, definitely. Sort of later on in the year, one could expect that. 

And one other way to look at that is there’s been a divergence, and I’ve ignored these historically, to my detriment. There’s been a divergence in between the oil price and oil and gas equity prices and oil and gas equities have done a lot better over the last, let’s say, month and a half than oil prices have. And it looks like the equity market is telling us that the companies… 

I mean, one, the companies are just very cheap, so I would think naturally they should rise. But the degree of divergence is so much that it seems like the equity market is making a forward looking bet on higher than strip prices in the future. And the forward market and the oil paper market is making the bet that it will be lower.

So there does seem to be a noteworthy divergence that could mean much higher inflation, like you’re saying, but it might also be that shelter matters a lot more and some other stuff matters a lot more, and it might really take diesel rising a lot and gasoline rising a lot to actually shift back into high inflation.

TN: Okay, is that divergence between only upstream companies or is it upstream midstream? Is it the whole stack? What is that divergence? What does that include?

JY: So I’m most focused on upstream. I don’t actually remember whether it also included the pipelines and services. But on the upstream, definitely both the large cap, the XLE ETF that includes Exxon and Chevron and stuff, as well as XOP, which includes sort of independence.

TN: Fantastic. Okay, Josh, that is excellent. Thank you so much for that. On that inflation topic,

let’s move to Jackson Hole. Of course, there’s a lot of breathy analysis of Jackson Hole over the last couple of days, and there will be over the weekend. But Sam Rines, who has the most valuable newsletter that I know of that’s available in America today, covered this week, and there’s a chart that he has in there looking at the meeting probabilities and also looking at the headlines that may or may not come out of Jackson Hole.

Sam, can you talk us through that? And what do you expect some of the conclusions to be?

Sam Rines: Yeah, so I thought it was really interesting. The Fed said nothing all that interesting today. I mean, it might have been a shock to people who weren’t paying attention, but the Fed just reiterated about, I don’t know, 99% of what it’s already said and set it in different words. And Powell said it basically eight and a half minutes. Right. That was the big change. All he did was take a bunch of time out of the speech, condense it and say, we’re not pivoting. They were never pivoting. The pivot was out of the picture at the last meeting. He made that pretty clear during that press conference. 

So it’s really interesting to me that there was an actual equity reaction to it. It’s also really interesting

that there was relatively little reaction out of Currencies, relatively little reaction out of global interest rates and only a reaction on the equity front. It was like it was a shock to the equity guys, and everybody else was like, yeah, we need that. So I think that was really the big takeaway was it was a shock to the equity

markets, but everyone who had to be paying attention for the last six months was like, yeah, no big deal.

So Jackson Hole I think one of the things that I had said about it in the newsletter was, you’re not going

to learn anything new. And the only thing that we learned was that Paul was going to say absolutely nothing new and absolutely nothing interesting, and equity markets would still react to it in a pretty meaningful way. The idea that we were going to go to 4% and then stay at 4% was already priced in to Fed fund futures through the end of ’23.

So this whole idea that Powell somehow shocked the market. It’s one of the more entertaining things

today, in my opinion, is just that equity markets were so taken aback by it while you had three or four basis point moves in interest rates across the US curve. And just a big shrug. 

To me, the big news today was probably out of Europe where people were potentially discussing 75 basis

point hike from the ECB. The Czech Republic doing an emergency meeting on energy.

There were some more interesting things that happened in the market today, but I think I overlooked in favor of an eight and a half minute speech by somebody just re iterating what he had already said 900 times.

TN: So let’s talk about Europe a little bit, because that’s interesting. I mean, Europe is in a world of hurt, right? We’ve talked about that several times. So what do you think the path for the ECB is from here? Do you think they’re going to hike 75?

SR: No, I think they hike 50. I think 75 is probably a little too aggressive for them. I mean, we were talking about ten basis points three months ago as being something that we thought would be interesting. And now the idea of floating 75, I think that was mostly to defend the currency, right. They knew that there was a known that you were going into Jackson Hole and if you front ran that with the leak that you might go 75, you’re going to defend your currency somewhat against a potentially hawkish Powell. It’s pretty straightforward in terms of defending a Euro at one. So I think that was basically the case. Call 50, maybe 75, I don’t really care. They’re going to hike, and they’re going to hike in a pretty meaningful way, particularly for a place that is already screwed. Right into the recession, right? Yeah.

I think it’s a pretty interesting opportunity to go long the long-end booned and short the Euro. Yeah, we’ve talked about that a few times here and that’s great.

TN: Okay, guys, what else do you have on the, Albert, Josh? Are you guys hearing anything else on US economy or Jackson Hole? 

Albert Marko: Sam mentioned about the equity reaction. How much of that is really because

of the low liquidity right now? There’s no traders really out there, no volume out there really, at the moment. 

SR: But liquidity works both ways, right? If you have low liquidity, you can rip it. It can get ripped either way. And I think what you saw immediately following his speech was you saw a leg down, then you saw 1% leg down, 1% leg back up, and then a two to 3% leg down, depending on what industry you want to look at. Right. So liquidity works.

AM: But you’re right, nothing was new. That rally that they launched for the weeks prior to that, you expected them to go hawkish after that, what are they going to do? Go dovish and go to 4400, 4500 and look ridiculous? Nothing new came out of this. He’s right about that. 

SR: I think there was an opportunity for them to potentially begin to say, hey, we’re going 50s and then 25s, and then we’re going to pause at 4% and we’re going to see how much we’ve ruined everything. There was the potential for that.

But then when you get STIs, you get financial conditions ripping higher, you have meme stocks

coming back into the news. Yeah. The Fed is not going to consider that type policy. If anything, they’re going to look at that and say, hey, it looks like short term neutral is a little bit higher than we thought it was. We need to move a little further and then begin to pause.

So if anything, the equity rally going into Jackson Hole was more problematic for equity markets than people thought. 

TN: So do you think some of those 25 expected 25s could be 50s in say, Q4?

SR: I don’t care if they’re going to get to four and then they’re going to stop and they’re going to get to four before they’re going to get to four around December and then they’re going to see what kind of carnage they’ve done. If they haven’t done enough carnage, they go higher. Pause there.

TN: That makes sense.

SR: The pace is probably I would say the pace kind of matters for shock and all purposes,

but in general the pace is kind of meh.

The end is really important and the length of staying at the peak is what is truly the most important thing here. If they’re there for a year and a half and they don’t care about a recession, that’s one thing. If they’re there for six months and cut by 75 because we’re in a recession, then go back, that’s a different thing. But I really don’t care how quickly they get there.

TN: Okay. And the run up to the midterms has no bearing on what the Fed is going to do, is that? 

SR: None.

TN: None. Okay. I just hear that from time to time. Well, the midterms are coming, so the Fed

is going to just relax for a few months.

AM: You hear that mainly from me. From my perspective, it’s always been like when I say Fed, I want to say Treasury and Fed together because of Yellen.  But sometimes they have those concerns. Like they don’t want the current administration looking bad. I had a midterm. Yeah.

SR: That should sail.

AM: Well, that should sail because just because of the ridiculous antics that they pulled recently with inflation, it’s being ridiculous. So you’re right, that ship has sailed.

TN: Well, I mean, are they ridiculous or not? I mean, inflation has definitely risen and they’ve definitely taken action to offset inflation.

AM: Yeah, they’ve done that in a vacuum because China is not online yet and Europe is a complete disaster at the moment. Right. And we haven’t had a real event to drive oil up into like the 130s, 140s again. God forbid we have a hurricane in like a week that goes into the Gulf of Mexico while Grandhome is sending out letters to all the refiners saying you can’t export anything anymore. There’s plenty of room. 

TN: She’s encouraging them. She’s not requiring them. Right?

AM: Yeah. Okay, well, we’ll see about that.

JY: She’s making them an offer that they can’t refuse. So my general take was just like, I’m not a Fed watcher. My general take was kind of stagflation coming out of this. Right? It’s like policy that can’t get too extreme to really like they’re going to try to torch the economy, but they’re also not going to go to a 15 interest rate or anything like that. They’re going to go to a four or whatever, and maybe they’ll go slower or faster.

I think there’s some political motivation there. So maybe they go slower and then they turn on higher after the election. Maybe not. Unclear. Kind of doesn’t matter from my perspective.

What does matter is, like Albert was saying, I think there’s a decent shot that we end up with higher oil prices. We end up with other factors. So, like, there are various drivers that are pushing, especially in the rental market, shelter higher, not lower. And so with persistent inflation in the biggest household bucket, and then with a likely move higher this winter in oil and diesel and probably also gasoline, it’s going to look pretty ugly. And if you have them stopping kind of at four, maybe going to let’s say five or something, but inflation is at ten or nine or whatever, right? Some directionally, really high number. At some point, you just start ticking in where you have negative real and positive nominal, and that’s just hard to break unless they go a lot higher. But if the economy is sucking, that makes it really hard. So that was my sort of general take from what they were saying.

AM: I wanted to come back and ask you about the SPR just real quick about the oil in it. Some of it has got to have degradation, and there’s a lot less barrels there that they can actually release. They might have to stop in end of September. You might start seeing oil rise even before October.

JY: Yes. My base case is not that. My base case is there’s a little bit of contamination, but they’ve managed to reduce that either by not pulling from the caverns that have had contamination historically or by treating the oil or something. My base case is that the oil there is extractable, except they can’t get the last barrel because there’s a certain percentage that needs to be there for the caverns to continue to be

functional, and they’re not going to destroy the storage caverns just to get the last oil. That’s my base case.

But I think there’s a reasonable expectation that there’s less oil there, given the history of contamination and the issues. And they did have a big draw this past week, but prior to that, they had multiple smaller draws. There’s also the crude quality thing, which I’m not really in the crude quality matters camp. I think there’s sort of this bizarre notion that crude, which is mostly fungible, really matters. It did to some extent before you could export oil and before various changes in US refineries.

At this point, it matters a little in terms of getting a couple of dollars, more or less per barrel, depending on transport cost. But I don’t think that’s really affecting the global balance. And I think it’s sort of like

a magic trick, right? It’s like focus on this and not like the thing that actually matters.

And so I’m glad you didn’t bring it up. I guess I brought it up and I just don’t think it matters, though.

TN: Great. Thanks for that, guys. Okay, let’s move on to China. Albert, over the past a week or so, we’ve seen a number of stories saying that China fiscal stimulus may finally be coming.

And we’ve seen some movements, say, in China, tech stocks, these sorts of things. So can you talk us through what you’re seeing with China in the stimulus camping? And why now? They’ve waited so long. Why would it be coming now?

AM: Well, it’s coming out because the policy and the dollar is so high, the Chinese economy is struggling at the moment and they come out with these mini stimulus announcements and there were shots across the bow. I mean, the worst thing right now that the Fed can happen is China stimulating commodities ripping at the moment, that would be absolutely atrocious. Inflation will start going higher and we seen like Josh said a 10% CPI prints coming out and they’re going to be forced to do 75 basis points again. It would throw a wrench in a lot of things and it’s not good if they stimulate it right now. 

But after the election, after the US election, they can do what they want to do because they have their own interests at heart at the moment. They cannot let the Chinese economy fall to a point where they can’t recover in the near future.

TN: So what do you see coming out in the near term? This $229 billion bond sale? That was a start, right? So do you see more than that or dramatically more than that coming out? And how quickly do you expect? 

AM: Yeah, I expect by January that will have a significant stimulus package coming out. This little SEC audit deal was basically a gift to delay it as much as long as they can.

TN: Okay, very good. And then so you don’t expect a significant amount of Chinese stimulus before, say, December or something like that?

AM: Yeah, before December. 

TN: Okay. Sam, what do you think about that? Do you think China stimulus hurts the US? 

SR: I really don’t think that the Fed would care or go 75. I mean, it’s commodities, right? And the Fed tries to ignore commodities as much as possible. So yeah, you’re going to get a rip in oil because there’s not enough oil to go around, there’s not enough oil for China and it’s going to coincide with the end of the SPR release. So you’re kind of screwed there. 

Copper, all that stuff goes higher. I don’t think the Fed cares. The Fed is going to try to cut that out. Then they’ll pivot core and you’re going to have a really weak Renminbi and you’re going to have probably at least a little bit of a pass through to US consumers on the goods front as you get goods to flow back. 

So you could actually see kind of an interesting offset where core goods kind of begins to decline on a Chinese reopen. Commodities rip and you get the, hey look, it looks like core is moving back towards two. We’re not going to have to raise rates as much because we don’t really care about headline, we can’t control oil, we can’t pump more oil. 

So I think it’s a weird kind of catch 22 where the Fed is going to have to pivot from talking about headline to talking about core. But I think they’re happy to do it as long as that core is really moving lower because I think they know they’re screwed on energy. They’re in so much trouble in energy, commodities, et cetera, that there’s nothing they can do.

TN: I think you’re right and we’ve needed a weaker CNY for about six, seven months now. So I think it’s about time and we’ve started to see it move, but I think we’ll start to see it move more dramatically soon.

Okay, guys, let’s start looking at the week ahead. Just a quick kind of round the horn of what do you think, Albert, what are you looking for for the coming week?

AM: I’m looking for a little bit of a rally back off these loads here, try to bring it back to 4200. I just personally think that the economy is in trouble, they’re delaying a recession as long as they possibly can, but it’s coming. So I think a little bit of a pump next week and then probably heading back down into September.

TN: Okay, Sam? 

SR: Oh, I agree with Albert there. I think the knee jerk reaction today to the Fed is going to be unloud as people begin to look at what really went on in rates. What’s going on in FX. The concentration should be on what’s going on in Europe. And the flow versus the stock problem that nobody seems to be able to figure out. Which is you can stock as much gas as you want in a bunch of caverns in Europe. If you don’t have flow over the winter, your stocks really don’t matter. I think there’s going to be a little bit of a realization that stock versus flow matter more than stocks and at some point you’ve got to figure that one out. So that’s what I’m watching.

TN: Interesting. Okay, Josh, what are you looking for in the week ahead?

JY: Just more information on oil demand. So we’re starting to see reports of surprise, higher oil demand than people would have thought, which coincide with actual reports of oil demand when you look at the raw data. So that should be interesting to see sort of how that gets processed and then sort of how oil price may or may not get suppressed. Again, just as we get more good data points, price should go higher, but it doesn’t seem to want you for now.

TN: Very good. From the energy capital of the Universe in Houston, Texas, Josh Young, Sam Rines.

Guys. Thanks very much. Albert, thanks. Have a great day, have a great weekend and a great week ahead.

Learn more about CI Futures here: https://completeintel.com/2022Promo

In this episode, we talked about the European drought — and looked at the cost, energy impacts, and industry impacts. We also talked about coal and discussed more broadly energy. But more specifically coal, and what will be some of the issues around it. How will the coal issues impact refineries and other downstream activities? Finally, we looked at inflation. It’s been covered to death last week — CPI PPI — but we also put a few words in on it.

Key themes
1. Europe drought: Cost, energy & industry impact
2. Coal & energy
3. Inflation
4. What’s ahead for next week?

—————————————————————-

This is the 30th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon/
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Listen to this episode on Spotify:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4mtSPQCdtx5p7bfWiVb5M5?si=a803b935d5fb44b7

Time Stamps

0:00 Start
0:49 Key themes for this Week Ahead
2:16 Europe drought: containers on the Rhine
4:22 How hot is Europe compared to other places?
5:25 How is France doing?
6:02 Europe’s embargo of Russian coal – will it make things worse?
7:48 The beneficiaries of Europe’s Russian coal embargo
9:32 Where’s most of the coal coming from?
10:00 Rhine River and how it affects coal and crude transport
13:00 Is there a silver lining in what’s happening in Europe?
14:16 How will the happenings in Europe impact politics in the region?
15:36 How you should be playing European equities?
16:40 Have we hit the peak inflation?
20:22 Will there be a Feb pivot?
21:17 What’s for the week ahead? Listen to the podcast version on

Transcript

Hi everyone. Thanks for joining us for The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash with Complete Intelligence. We’re joined by Albert Marko and Tracy Shuchart as usual. And Sam is out this week and he’s fishing, so I hope he sends us some when he’s back. Some good fish pictures, though. Great pictures from Maine or Vermont or wherever he is. So it’s just beautiful up there.

So this week we’ve got a couple of things on top. First, we’re talking about the European drought. We’re looking at the cost, we’re looking at the energy impacts, industry impacts. Then we’re looking at coal more broadly, energy, but specifically coal, and what will some of the coal issues, how will that impact refinery and other downstream activities?

Finally, we’re looking at inflation. It’s been covered to death this week, CPI PPI, but we’re going to kind of put a few words in on it and then we’ll look at the week ahead.

So before we get started, please like this video, please subscribe to this video. Please give us your comments. We always do come in. We always do respond to comments, even if they’re negative.

And also we have our $50 a month promo for CI Futures, which is our subscription platform for everything that’s traded in, everything economics, top 50 countries. So currencies, commodities, equity indices, $50 a month. You can do it a month at a time. You can do it a year at a time. Check it out.

We do forecast a twelve-month horizon. You can see our error rates, you can see correlations and everything for every single asset that’s on there. So this is a limited-time offer. I think it’s only for another two weeks. Limited time offer, please check it out. Please subscribe. Biggest thing you have at risk is $50 and you can cancel.

All right, so thanks very much for that. Guys, let’s dive into this for Europe. I want to look at there have been a couple of things out, stories out today about containers on the Rhine not being able to get. There’s a tweet from Bloomberg Energy that we’re showing where container companies can’t get containers up the Rhine and obviously the heat and the drought and there are a number of issues for Europe and Germany specifically.

So Albert, can you kind of go into that? And we’re going to switch to the water levels on the Rhine as well so you can see the red line is well below year to date for water levels on the Rhine.

So Albert, can you kind of help us understand what’s going on there and what the impacts are going to be?

AM: Yeah, I’ll circle back to Germany, but there are other countries that are having similar problems at the moment. You have the Italian. Italy’s pool river completely dried up. Unbelievable. The UK suffering the same effects. Heat waves are hitting France. And this is really bad timing, especially when it comes to inflation, because the commodities and energy prices are skyrocketing.

Now, they have problems for the irrigation of the crops. They have transportation down certain riverways. So the costs are just set to inflate even further from this point on.

Germany, being pretty much the economic engine of Europe right now, is just absolutely taking it on the chin month after month. And this is certainly something that they don’t really need to be happening at the moment.

The Rhine River, like you’re saying, has big effects for multiple industries, specifically energy. They just can’t get things up and down the river at the moment. And the stuff that they can get down the river, the shipping costs have gone. I don’t even know what the rate is the last time I saw this, two or three times the normal rate.

So at this point, it’s like the Europeans, they need a winter where they have a lot of snow or a lot of rain. Otherwise, they’re facing a financial crisis coming.

TN: So let me ask you this. This is going to sound pretty ignorant, but I live in Texas. It’s really hot. Florida, it’s kind of warm, a little bit beautiful. Great place to move if you’re from California. But it’s easy for us to say, “gosh, we deal with heat all the time, it’s not a big deal.” But Europe is a lot hotter than it usually is, right? So how much hotter? Celsius or? 

AM: I wouldn’t say that. Maybe the timing of the heat waves is really bad with the droughts. That’s the problem. Because it’s not exponentially hotter than it was previous summers, but it’s just the timing of it is really bad and there’s been no rainfall. Europe has always had a problem with fresh water supply, and that’s why the United States has been blessed that we have ample fresh water.

Forget about the lake meat stuff that you hear right now. I’m talking about in the farm, the Midwest, where all the farms and all the industry is ample fresh water. And Europe doesn’t have that and they are suffering for it right now.

TN: Now, the key crop… So we’ve talked about energy before and you’ve said France, they’ve kind of got their act together and they don’t have to worry like Germany or in Italy does. How is France doing compared to the other places? I’m sure they’re suffering, but are they a little bit better put together? 

AM: They are a little bit better put together. They have ample food supply that sustains their nation. I think they sold 40% of the wheat crop to China, which I think is probably going to hurt them later on in the year as the job persists. But for France right now, they’re actually sitting far better than Germany is. 

TN: Okay, great. So let’s dig down a little bit more on energy. Tracy, you mentioned before we got on that Europe just embargoed Russian coal, right? With all of the issues and the industry issues in Germany, how much worse does that embargo make things? Before we get into coal prices and all that stuff. How much worse does that make things, the embargo on Russian coal?

TS: Well, it’s just another example of self harm, right. Because we’re already seeing… Russia is already prepared for this. We’ve already seen them sell oil to China, and India makes up for those barrels that are not making it to the west. Right.

And so they’ve already been doing that with coal. Russia has actually become India’s third largest supplier within the last couple of months. And to avoid Western sanctions, they’re also paying in yuan and the Hong Kong dollar. And that’s not to say that the US dollar, they’re trading dollars for those currencies to avoid Western sanctions. So it’s not that they’re not using dollars anymore, but it is that they figured out a clever way to get around sanctions. 

TN: Just circumconvention, right? 

TS: Right. I think that just like oil, where everybody expected three to 4 million barrels to be taken off the market immediately, we never saw this come to fruition because it was such heavily discounted. Those barrels found our way to market anyway, and so is Russian coal, to be honest. So really this hurts Germany more than anything.

That said, the flip side of that is that the beneficiaries of that policy are going to be Australia, United States, Colombia and South Africa.

TN: Okay. So if we look at Australia, just to kind of focus in on there, China barred Australian coal about two years ago, a year and a half ago, something like that? So is there ample supply in Australia to support Europe? And is that new? Have they already been redirecting things to Europe?

TS: I mean, they’ve already been redirecting things everywhere else because demand has suddenly gone up. Right. And not globally. So what we’re seeing, if we look at the benchmark Australian price, which is Newcastle Coal, their prices are about 400 AUD, which is about $284. 

If we look at what current spot prices are going for in the United States, particularly on the East Coast where shipping is a lot less, we can see that those are significantly lower. So that does bode well for coal companies on the East Coast with access to ports, closer access to ports, rather than coming, say, from the Midwest or the West Coast.

TN: So we’ve got the weekly coal price commodity spot prices for us up right now. So the highest there is 186 for Illinois Basin coal. Right. So where is most of that coal coming from? Is it Appalachia? Is it Joe Manchin territory?

TS: You’re going to want to look at Appalachia. Okay. They’re closest to the East Coast, which means your shipping costs significantly go down because you don’t have to ship it across the country first. Clean coal. Yes.

TN: So that does bode well for the United States, just because it’s significantly lower. But I kind of wanted to go back and in the same vein, if we go back to the Rhine River. The fact is that because water levels are so low, they’re about 1.5 meters deep right now. That will sit around 1.2 meters deep. It sits in about 30cm leave room. At the lowest levels right now, where there’s nobody traveling, obviously, they’re about 42cm. Actually, the lowest was in the lowest in the last century was in 2018, where they were about 25cm.

But what’s happening is because, what’s happening with the energy industry in general, because we’re talking there’s a lot of oil products sent down that river as well as coal, is that what these vessels are having to do is they’re having the third with what they’re normally carrying.

TN: So. If you had a vessel that went down and you’re paying X amount of dollars, now you have three vessels going down because you have to split that into a third because those water levels are so low. There’s more demand, there’s higher shipping costs, lower capacity. So those shipping costs are times, what, five or something per unit per ton.

TS: Or are absolutely ridiculous. And then when we talk about like low river levels, they typically impact regional, downstream, refined products. Right. Rather than upstream. So this is going to have a major impact, particularly in Switzerland and Germany again. So this is going to increase the cost of their refined product, particularly diesel, which there’s already a diesel shortage. So I expect that situation to get ten times worse as well as coal and other commodities that are sent out the river.

TN: Okay, so just to shift a little bit downstream. So if you talk about refined products and then we go a step further to say, plastics and that sort of thing. And we look at say, the electronics industry in Germany. We look at automotive industry in Germany. So do we expect a major impact on those industries as well? And at what pace will that happen? Will that be three months? Will that be nine months?

TS: Oh, absolutely. I think that’s going to have a major impact, especially because we’re already looking at those industries, looking to a lot of the manufacturing industry in particular are looking to go from gas to oil switching or gas to diesel switching. 

So if diesel becomes a problem, right. And oil becomes a problem coming down the river, that’s going to make that situation entirely worse. So we’re looking at this situation, I would say three to six months, much sooner than later for certain, especially as we head into the winter.

TN: Oh yeah. So it sounds to me we know that Europe has inflation problems. Right. We know that Europe has energy problems with the river issues and the drought issues. They now have crop problems and they have supply chain problems and they have, say, secondary impacts of, say,  refining secondary, tertiary impacts of refining issues. Right?

So I’m not asking this to be funny, like is there good news out of Europe? Or is there a bright spot in Europe right now? 

AM: No, there really isn’t. There really isn’t. Everything coming out of Europe right now is negative. The ECB came out today and said they’re not going to raise any more rates until next year and they’re looking at a secondary inflation event, causing bigger problems for the European Union and the UK. I don’t want to leave the UK out of it because they got drought issues and transportation inflation issues to deal with all, but there’s no silver lining for the next six to twelve months, in my opinion.

I think the euro is actually going to go down to 95 subparity for quite a while. 

TN: This year? 

AM: At the end of the year and into next year. Okay, so let me ask a couple of questions about markets and politics in Europe. First of all, how will this environment impact European politics in the near term? I expect the German coalition to break apart probably sooner than later. These inflationary effects are going to cause big problems. I mean, just the energy costs alone in Germany, God help them if they see frozen Germans dying, elderly people dying over the winter. It’s just a political nuclear bomb over there.

TN: Okay. Italy, places like that, obviously? 

AM: Italy is a disaster. Italy has always been a disaster. It’s just like their government’s rise and fall with the wind.

TN: UK, same? Do you think we’ll have a very short term government form and then it will fall away next year or something like that?

AM: Yeah, I believe one year. One year will last about a year. The French government is a little more stable, but even then McCrone lost the majority there. But Europe right now is in turmoil. The Dutch. Same problems with the Dutch. All these coalitions that have slim majorities are just going to start breaking apart. Okay, so ECB has kind of lost its backbone. European politics is in disarray. The Euro is likely to devalue or depreciate to 95.

TN: How are you playing, in a broad sense, equities in Europe? Do you think it’s a real danger zone for the next six months? Or again, are there broad equities? 

AM: When, there’s blood in the water you want to start buying. I would look at what’s systemically important to the European Union, like Deutsche Bank, French Bank Societe Generale, BASF.

These systemically important components to the economy have to be shored up so they’ll get bailouts

of support or whatnot and stimulus packages. That’s where. I’d be buying probably in January, February. 

TS: I think we’re already seeing a ton of bailouts, particularly in utilities right now. And so obviously those are going to help those stock prices. And so I expect we just hit the tip of the iceberg with Unifer. Right. And there’s a lot more to come. Those are the sectors that I would be watching.

TN: Wow, that’s pretty bad news. Okay. 

AM: It’s almost to the point where European equities will be cheaper than Chinese equities. That’s what we’re getting to.

TN: Okay, that’s good to know. We’ll keep an eye out for that. Okay, let’s move on to inflation. So everyone’s covered CPI and PPI this week. Please don’t turn off the show right now. We’re going to say something, but I did a survey yesterday. Very scientific, very statistically valid, Twitter survey yesterday looking at in light of CPI and PPI, where do we think Fed rates will go? And it’s pretty much a tie between 75 and 50. So I wonder, guys, we heard for days. There was zero month-on-month inflation, right? CPI inflation. And we saw negative. PPI. These are the things that you look at when there’s hyperinflation. We can’t find good news in the year on year. So let’s look at incremental data. So do you think we’ve hit peak inflation in the US?

AM: No. Secondary effect of inflation coming, mainly because the Fed started to rally this market for political optics. Commodities are rising. I mean, they’ve tried so hard to keep oil and wheat down, and it just simply will not break certain levels. It just won’t go down. Stay in 80s for the oil. It won’t break 750, 770 in wheat. And they just can’t do it. They have to go after these things, but they can’t during the election season.

TN: Okay, so you bring a good point with crude oil. There has been a lot of attention and work to keep crude oil prices and gasoline prices down. Tracy, how long can that happen? Because really, a lot of the zero or negative is in energy, right?

TS: Exactly. And I think what we’re seeing a lot here especially if you look at the front line, is I think we have a lot of things going on right now with the fact that as much Russian crude oil wasn’t taken off the market that people initially thought. There were recession fears. The SPR garage are really starting to weigh on that front month. So there’s a lot of things going on here that are kind of weighing on that front month. Plus open interest is nothing. And we also have China is still on their zero COVID policy and hasn’t opened up yet. So there’s a lot of things weighing on that the market right now. That said is that as soon as the SPR stops, which is end of October, coincidentally near in the Midterms.

Once that stopped and I still think Xi is going to have to open up China somewhat near the People’s Party Congress. And so I think that looking into the end of 2022 and into 2023, we definitely could see those higher oil prices again regardless of what the Fed does.

TN: Okay. Now, compound that real quick, compound those oil prices rising with the cost of rent going up astronomically and I don’t know what magic they’re going to be able to pull to keep CPI under 10%. What month? Like October, November, December?

AM: October, November. December. Okay. Smack in the middle of the Midterms. And they got to be seeing this. They have to be seeing it. If they’re not seeing it right now, it’s purely because the White House is interfering and wants politically driven news for the markets right now. 

TN: Okay, so do you think like a slight pivot to 50 basis points in September is possible or likely and then that eases up,  helps markets out, goose’s markets going into the Midterms and then we start to see this inflation rush come on and say late October, November?

AM: Well, first of all, we have to see what Powell says at Jackson Hole. Whether he’s dovish or hawkish. This rally makes me think that he’s going to have to be hawkish. Right. And then we’re still looking at probably a 50 basis point rate hike in September and after that I don’t want to even project what happens after that because it really depends on what CPI is going to be printing.

TS: Agree with that. 

TN: Okay, perfect guys. So you’re talking about markets rallying. Let’s talk about the week ahead. Equities have done pretty good this week, right? And commodities have done pretty well this week as well. So what are we looking for next week? You say volume is thin. Okay. So do we have another thin

volume week next week? Markets get goose, people feel good and then they come back the following week and we see some drama? What are you expecting?

AM: Yeah, I think that they could take this up closer to 4320 in the S&P. I think that’s the 200-day moving average, if I’m not mistaken. So they could take it up to there. But I’ll tell you what, looking at some of the order books on the S&P on the Futures, there is a boatload of sellers from 4260 to 4300. That boatload of them. 

TS: Yeah. It’s summer, right? Theres… Next week is the same as this week. You’re not going to see much until we hit September and fund managers and everybody’s back from their holidays. So I think we’ll see much of the same. The thing is that retail keeps trying to short this, which is kind of just a fuel to push this market higher because of liquidity issues. I think next week will be kind of the same. I’m not looking for outside of any disastrous thing happening, which hope not. But I think we’re going to stay in this well probably throughout the rest of August.

TN: And one of the things that I want to start thinking about, this isn’t the week ahead, but this is kind of the months ahead. I wonder if what happens if Russia Ukraine gets settled in October, November? That changes calculations pretty dramatically. So I’m starting to work on that hypothesis as well.

AM: Yeah, it depends on what a settlement is and whether Western sanctions still continue to bite the Russians, which are obviously going to retaliate economically. So a lot of the definitions need to be dealt with there.