Complete Intelligence

CI Banner
Login

Tag: cpi

Categories
Podcasts

Are Meme Stocks Just Relying on Momentum?

Tony Nash joins BFM for another podcast where they discussed mainly the US meme stocks and what might the Fed do? Equities are trading in a range and what is the catalyst of that? They also discussed oil prices and inflation in China as China’s Producer Price Index surged to its highest since 2008.

 

This podcast first appeared and originally published at https://www.bfm.my/podcast/morning-run/market-watch/are-meme-stocks-just-relying-on-momentum on June 10, 2021.

 

❗️ Check out more of our insights in featured in the CI Newsletter and QuickHit interviews with experts.

❗️ Discover how Complete Intelligence can help your company be more profitable with AI and ML technologies. Book a demo here.

 

Show Notes

WSN: So to help us make some headway into why markets are in the red, we have on the line with us Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. Good morning, Tony. U.S. equity markets seem to be trading in a rather tight range. What do you think the catalyst is going to be for markets to move either up or down?

 

TN: Sure. Everyone’s waiting for the Fed tomorrow morning to understand what direction and at what pace the Fed will tighten if they tighten or they twist or whatever they do. So it’s very much a fed and stimulus driven market. And people are waiting for the Fed to give them the sign for what’s next.

 

PS: And, Tony, the perspective on meme stocks like EMC, Clover Health, what’s happening there? Because yesterday there was a bit of downward pressure on them.

 

TN: They’re fun when you’re in the market with them, right? But you have to keep an eye on them all the time. I was talking to somebody earlier today who said they just bought one for fun. I think it was this morning. And 20 minutes later, they had made like 40 percent on their money and so they sold out. So, you just have to keep an eye on it minute by minute.

 

So if you’re in Asia, trading stocks is going to be a late night for you. But during the day here, people will buy in. They’ll see what happens. If they’re losing too much, they’ll sell quickly. If they’re making money, they’ll sell it once they hit their target.

 

WSN: So, Tony, you’re basically saying that all these treats have almost no fundamental basis in terms of valuations, is just momentum, is it?

 

TN: No, no. We’re at that point in the cycle where you’ve been on a small cap and make 40 percent. You’re not seeing much movement at all in the large cap stocks. You’re not seeing much movement at all in the indices. We’ve really gone to the long tail to see where the action is. And that’s really a scary time for the market.

 

The Fed knows this. They’re smart people, so they know that people are effectively gambling. So you’ve seen the kind of fears come out of crypto currencies over the past month. I wonder how that will happen. Or I expect the Feds to come out of equities or at least some of these more risky equities with some sort of Fed discussion.

 

WSN: So they fall dramatically like what we saw with Bitcoin. I mean, at one time, Bitcoin was up almost close to a hundred percent. And then on a year to date basis, it’s only up 20%. Is it all going to end in a bit of tears?

 

TN: It depends on which stock it is. Most of them are really just sentiment-based and very short-term sentiment-based. The Fed will suck money out of the economy or throw money into the economy. And if they do something to suck money out of the economy, then you can see that stuff. You could see those mean stocks really get boring really quickly.

 

WSN: So what are your expectations then in terms of the Fed and what they plan to do? I mean, how much of it is going to be driven by me, CPI numbers? Are you expecting inflation to be transitory or perhaps something more persistent?

 

TN: Yeah, I think well, you know, I think we’re going to see inflation to to be sticky for a few months, probably August, September. And we’ve been saying this for a while. But once once things are moving and there isn’t the kind of delightful surprise of reopening kind of at some point in the future. And it’s it’s happening already. You know, I think a lot of the excitement is going to fall out. There is not much more stimulus that can come out.

 

And so I think we’re going to hit a point where people kind of look at valuations and look at, say, revenue numbers and are just a little bit worried. So on the inflation side, things like eggs, the corn price, we expect the corn price to continue to rise in the summer. You know, soybean, these sorts of fundamentals, meats and proteins, they’re going to continue to rise on. Issues, but some of these other things like like some of the metals, these sorts of things, they may fall off.

 

TN: You’ve already seen copper start to stabilize. And so, you know, we see some of these things that have reached a point. We’re not sure that they’re necessarily going to go much higher, but we think they’ve kind of stabilized in a zone.

 

PS: And, Tony, you were mentioning just now about the defacing of equity does explain why treasuries rallied. Hot tenure yields are now at one point forty nine percent.

 

TN: Yeah, I think it does. I think people are you know, people are in a lot of cash right now. I mean, you see you see people worried, at least some of the the active investors that I know over the last, say, two months, more and more of them have moved to cash because they’re a little bit worried. So that’s not a big call on my part, saying we’re going to have market fallout. It’s just an observation of the more people I talk to, the more saying, look, we’ve really taken out of a lot of these speculative trades and really taken it to cash.

 

WSN: And let’s talk about oil. I mean, oil prices inching up or actually brought past the seventy dollars per barrel for WTI. Are we going to see U.S. shale producers return in a big way or will they take a wait and see approach?

 

TN: Do you know? You’ll see you’ll see an incremental return of shale producers. The real problem is that the OPEC plus group has about six point five million barrels sitting on the sidelines per month. So that’s accumulated. Right. And so they can turn that back on any time. So shale starts to come back in. They start to incrementally add barrels to the market and it pushes the oil price down. So I’m not all that worried about seeing, you know, a three figure oil price because there’s so much supply in the market and demand is coming on very slowly.

 

WSN: So do you think prices will be around this level? Can it break past 70 convincingly?

 

TN: It can. I mean, I think you can see you can see a little bit of upside from here, but I am not necessarily sure that we’ll see, you know, over 80 dollars or something like that on a sustained basis. There are a lot of people saying oil, the same people when oil was in the 30s, that it was going down a 20s and it would be there for the next two years. So, you know, I think you get the extremes in a lot of these commodity calls.

 

But but I don’t necessarily think we’re going there. It’s possible, but but it’s not within our outlook for sure.

 

WSN: All right. Thank you so much for your time. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, giving us his views on global markets. I think an interesting conversation about meme stocks because really that has grabbed headlines and a bit of question marks about what is driving price direction. And it’s actually not fundamental. It’s momentum. Maybe people just watching this and trying to make a quick buck out of it.

 

PS: If you’re in a different time zone, which I think Tony was alluding to, be prepared for very late nights at a roller coaster. Right. So if you’re doing the trading day and you can monitor and you can cut your losses, I think that’s the way to go. But if you’re based in Asia.

 

WSN: But I, I would I would put a caveat. I think this is not for everyone. Clearly, I think this is for maybe perhaps people who are a bit more sophisticated, willing to to stomach the risk reward because it could go either way.

 

PS: Well, we’ll think about it. Right. There is no theme in meme stocks.

 

WSN: You know, it’s whatever people like.

 

PS: Exactly. You’ve got Hertz a car rental. You’ve got GameStop a game gaming business. You’ve got AMC theater. There is no connection. There is no basis to see it as a collective theme. No one is going through. Maybe they all going through a hot time when some form or another. But it’s very hard to live on. That’s what you sit following the fundamentals.

 

WSN: Yeah, most of them actually in in the red. In the red, they’re all suffering from losses or they’re actually businesses, which like Blockbuster was one meems at one time, which is clearly going out of fashion. But, you know, there’s some for whatever reason, retail participation or interests.

 

PS: So it’s counter fundamental.

 

WSN: Yeah. Buy what you like.

 

It doesn’t have to make sense. But talking about something the markets like Singapore grab has has postponed the expected completion of its merger with the US. Back now, this ride hailing and food delivery giant Worx working on a financial audit for the past three years as the requirement, as per the requirement by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Now, according to a statement released yesterday, the deal is now set to be completed in the fourth quarter of this year versus earlier expectations of completion in the third quarter.

 

PS: I mean, grab post it really strong numbers. They’re consolidated. Group merchandise value rose 5.2 percent to USD three point six billion dollars. That’s equivalent to the total value of merchandise all over C2C extreme right now with strong food delivery growth offsetting a decline in rate, healing the companies that it didn’t provide revenue or profit. But grabs it in April, it’s set to have a market value of about 40 billion dollars after the combination with Altimeter Growth Corp., the spec of Brett Gutsiness, Altimeter Capital Management, now the combined entity stock will trade on the Nasdaq under the ticker Greb after the completion of the deal.

 

But I’m just going to be really curious, what’s the appetite going to be like? Maybe we’ll get some color in terms of really how well they’re doing financially, because a lot of these type of apps, I mean, super apps, as you know, they might have really, really very strong top line numbers, but profit might be non-existent or really dismal. Right. Because all of these apps were basically trying to create market share at the expense of anything else.

 

And this is the challenge with growth stocks, where you have this risk of higher interest rates, you may not get the valuations you want. So this is the challenge. And you see the contrast between China and us in China as we were talking a Jacuzzi yesterday, all the IPO for quite retail centric. But if you see what’s happening in the U.S., the IPOs are not so retail centric, you know, yes, they tend to be quite B2B driving enterprise growth and all that because it’s a different market in this market.

 

And they don’t really think about growth in the way maybe China thinks about it.

 

WSN: Yeah, but I’m just curious what kind of valuations at the end of the day they’ll get so but we definitely, definitely be watching this space very closely. I think this is clearly Southeast Asia’s big unicorn that everyone is keeping your eye on. BFM eighty nine point nine.

Categories
QuickHit

Inflation: Buckle up, it may get worse (Part 2)

Nick Glinsman and Sam Rines are back in this QuickHit episode special Cage Match edition about inflation, part two, where we start looking into things like raw materials cost versus processing and manufacturing bottlenecks. Also discussed are the wage inflation and labor availability and how long these impacts will last. And finally, we start talking about central banks. What will the Fed do? Will it do anything? When will it do it?

 

For those who prefer to listen to a podcast, here’s the Spotify link for you: https://open.spotify.com/episode/3CK3SNwMK97oWLy1DMRQnD?si=uV1As8VsTxSVrQNE0iYuiA You can also find us in other podcast audio streaming services. Just search “QuickHit”. Thank you!

 

Part one covered a lot around specific commodity inflation and why it’s happening.

 

💌 Subscribe to CI Newsletter and gain AI-driven intelligence.

📺 Subscribe to our Youtube Channel.

📊 Forward-looking companies become more profitable with Complete Intelligence. The only fully automated and globally integrated AI platform for smarter cost and revenue planning. Book a demo here.

📈 Check out the CI Futures platform to forecast currencies, commodities, and equity indices

 

This QuickHit episode was recorded on April 28, 2021.

 

The views and opinions expressed in this nflation: Buckle up, it may get worse QuickHit episode are those of the guests and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Complete Intelligence. Any content provided by our guests are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any political party, religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything.

 

Show Notes

 

TN: What the people in the middle. So the manufacturers, what capacity do they have to absorb these price rises? What are you guys seeing when you talk to people when you read? Are you seeing that manufacturers can absorb the lumber prices, the copper prices and other things, or are they passing that directly along?

 

NG: Sorry, Sam. I’m jumping in here. The beauty of that question right now is there was a major headline, the Financial Times talking about margin compression of how US corporates are going to be increasing prices. It was today. You have the likes of Chipotle. We’ll go on to that. That’s a labor cost issue. But the other company, you know, J&J, various bare necessities manufacturers for nappies for kitchenware also they’re saying they’re going to have to put price pressure through to the consumer and as we were discussing just before we started, there’s the elasticity of price increases is very high.

 

The elasticity of price decreases is extremely low. And I would contend that this becomes a rolling, snowball effect as these prices get passed through to the consumer. There are other costs that will be passed through to which we can talk about later on labor side. But this clearly, one of the signals that our well worth watching, on the margins in the corporate reporting, and all of them are suggestive of higher prices to the consumer.

 

Then you look at the ISM prices paid. I have a chart, a model that looks at that versus the CPI. And if that sticks to what it’s done over the last couple of decades, it’s indicative of CPI, actually, the big figure having a getting up to somewhere around four, maybe even higher.

 

TN: Which was kind of a China 2011 scenario of four to six percent CPI.

 

NG: Correct. But also also the the process of decoupling, as long as it may be, that process has created a demand because of the supply shock.

 

There’s a supply shock in the system. The demand is adjusting there, too, so that work as additional demand to fill in the gaps, so if the decoupling replacement process is long standing, the demand is still there, it’s a matter and then catching up. There’s a price disparity caused by that.

 

TN: Yeah, we definitely have a mismatch, at least in the short term. And will those supply chains catch up? That’s a real question. Sam, what’s your view on that in terms of manufacturers being able to absorb these cost and margin pressures?

 

SR: So I’ll jump to the housing market as my example, which I think is one of the more interesting ones filtering, filtering through down into lumber.

 

A very close friend of mine in Houston is delaying the start of one hundred and ninety homes that were supposed to be going into, well… He has the pads laid. He won’t build those homes until lumber prices go down. It’s the largest backlog he’s ever had. And that got us talking and kind of working through the market. And when you look at the market for pine studs in the US, it’s an intriguing look into kind of where the cost pressures are coming through, where mills are making mills that make the two by fours are making an absolute fortune off of the disruption.

 

But if you own a pine stand of several thousand acres, the tree that you are cutting off of it is the exact same price that it was a year ago. You have seen none of the prices at all.

 

TN: So there’s not a supply, a raw materials supply issue. It’s a processed materials issue.

 

SR: Yes. Exactly. So it’s the supply chain breaking down. You didn’t have enough. You didn’t have the mills up and running for a couple of months. You had about 40 percent of the capacity offline. And that created a shock to the system that eventually will be sorted out at some point.

 

We didn’t destroy any capacity for two by fours. We’re building even at the current rate, we’re building one point seven million homes. That’s nowhere near what we were doing in 2005. And yet lumber is four times where it was. So, yeah.

 

NG: May I ask a question because you’re obviously in touch with that level on a micro basis? So one of the things that I’ve been told by several different sources is they don’t disagree with your number coming down eventually. The problem the homebuilders now have is labor shortage.

 

SR: That might be a problem in the northeast. That might be a problem in a kind of coastal problem in the US, where I have fewer contacts in construction. But in the south, there’s no labor shortage. Wages are still very strong. You have some projects that were delayed for large oil which created a supply of able bodied plumbers, electricians, where there’s a shortage elsewhere. So I would say that’s probably very true for parts of the country.

 

There’s anecdotally, Beth. Beth Iron Works? One of the major boat docks in the north, northeast is driving around an RV trying to recruit people to come, trying to recruit welders. That was a problem before Covid that was and will remain a problem. The trades will be a big issue. Common labor, particularly in the South, does not appear to be an issue. That is an issue in the north.

 

NG: I’ve heard it’s an issue in Florida, actually, which is back to you point about coasts. Sorry, I interrupt.

 

TN: We’re in Texas. It’s the Promised Land. I mean, I think you…

 

NG: Would agree with you on that one.

 

TN: OK, so we’ve gone long. I know these are very detailed issues, but I’m going to ask another question. I did ask for some questions over Twitter.

 

So one of them came in from Brent. This was around supply chain disruptions, which we’ve already talked about. There’s another from Jerrett Heath. He says, “Will it be velocity or magnitude that causes the Fed to react to inflationary pressures?”

 

So what do you guys think? Are we going to see kind of the magnitude inflation push the Fed to react or what’s going to push the Fed to react to start to taper a little bit, if they do at all?

 

NG: I would say both at the same time. My great fear is that there is, and this was actually covered by the Wall Street Journal, but I’ve written and spoken about this as well. I sit there looking at the Fed becoming reactive rather than proactive, and the punch bowl analogy is gone, and that worries me enormously because they have great confidence in something that they’re forecasting as transitory and we know what their forecast record is, and if you really want a bad forecast record, just go to Frankfurt and see what the ECB is all about.

 

Now, it’s interesting to me that the conventional wisdom, the consensus forecast is for tapering to the end of this year as opposed to next year. It seems like the more people talk about the inflation pressure, the greater it is. But I wonder whether we will get tapering. That’s what worries me about the Fed.

 

I’ve been really working hard on looking at what Claudia Sahm has written and said over the last couple of weeks. She wrote an op ed in The New York Times and Bloomberg. She’s said… She’s an ex-economist for the FOMC and the Board of Governors, actually. And you get the feeling that the priorities are unemployment with equity, racial equity as opposed to equality. Furthermore, you get the feeling that financial stability… Both of those more important than inflation.

 

Now, if that’s the case and we start to see any signs of a taper tantrum, I worry that this Fed is going to do a proactive. Either stop the idea of tapering or do a twist or something that eases this market. I think they’ve got themselves, we have a very political Fed that, if it’s reactive by nature, it could be procyclical by action. And that’s where I find I really worry about it.

 

Then, we’ve got Powells term expiry February. Well, Lail Brainard is one of Janet Yellen’s favorite people. And if she gets in, we’re going full MMT. So those are my concerns about the tapering, its focus on financial stability and the risk that reactive policy will be procyclical.

 

TN: Interesting. OK, that’s great. Thank you. Sam. Help me understand, what’s your point of view on this? What gets the Fed to react and how do they react?

 

SR: Yeah, so I would go with neither of those will get the Fed to react. It’s not a question of should they or, you know, what they think they should do. But it’s a question of will they. And they won’t react to inflation. They do not care about the magnitude. They do not care about the velocity. And they won’t care for at least another nine months because we know the combination that they’re going to look through, the combination of basic facts and supply chain disruptions, at least through the end of the third quarter. They do not care. And then they will start the clock on their four quarters of inflation above or at two percent, and they want full employment before they raise. That’s four percent at least on measured unemployment.

 

So I would say, it, whatever you want to look at for inflation numbers, they don’t care. And maybe they should, but they don’t.

 

TN: So they don’t care yet. Or they don’t care period?

 

SR: They don’t care, period, until it’s been until it’s been a year of around 2 percent in this summer and fall don’t matter to them.

 

NG: Let me add one or it’s too late.

 

SR: Yes.

 

NG: I’m with you. You and I seem to agree. I mean, that is exactly the impression I got from Claudia Sahm’s words. I mean it was just straight up. And that’s where I worry, you know, I have a huge respect for Lail Brainard. She is a very, very accomplished economist. But she’ll go full MMT is what Janet Yellen wants. It’s what the Democrats want and I really worry about that.

 

Plus, you combine this with here we go back to Larry Summers. You combine this with this fiscal effort and one thing that, so in American terminology, progressive policies typically have historically been inflationary. In English terminology, is what I am, these socialist policies have a history of inflation. More government intervention, more pushing against the string of inefficient allocation of resources. Labor restrictions, minimum wage, universal basic income. It all leads to in one direction.

 

So I agree with you, Sam. I think the Fed doesn’t care and I think, hence, the reactive. When they react, it’s going to be, in my view, potentially too late. It’s already started.

 

TN: So I just sent out on Twitter a chart that Sam published about three weeks ago from another source on the negative impact of fiscal stimulus, and as we end up ’21, like in Q3, Q4 of ’21, that fiscal stimulus starts to have a negative impact. And certainly in ’22, the US fiscal stimulus has a negative impact.

 

So, you know, there are a number of things to worry about, not just with inflation, but with the efficacy of some of this fiscal stimulus that’s going into the market.

 

So with that, I want to thank both of you guys. Honestly, we could talk about this for hours. I would love to have this discussion with you guys again, you know, even in a couple of weeks to talk about other issues. So let’s see where this goes. But thank you so much. Thank you very much for your time on this. I really appreciate it.

 

We’ll get this out as quickly as possible. Thanks to everyone who’s watching this. Thanks for everyone who submitted questions. For those who did submit questions, for the questions we used, we’ll give you guys a month of CI Futures and look forward to the next time. Thanks for joining us.

 

Categories
Podcasts

Big US Bank Earnings And The Future Of Global Automakers

The IMF has upgraded its GDP forecasts for developed economies but what is the outlook like for developing economies in South-East Asia? The Morning Run asks Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. They also get into insights from the earnings out of JP Morgan and Goldman Sachs, as well as how traditional automakers will have to adapt in light of the EV boom.

 

This podcast first appeared and originally published at https://www.bfm.my/podcast/morning-run/market-watch/big-us-bank-earnings-and-the-future-of-global-automakers on April 15, 2021.

 

💁‍♀️ Check out more of our insights in featured in the CI Newsletter and QuickHit interviews with experts.

🎯 Discover how Complete Intelligence can help your company be more profitable with AI and ML technologies. Book a demo here.

 

 

Show Notes

 

LM: The IMF has upgraded its GDP forecasts for developed economies, but what is the outlook like for developing economies in South East Asia?

 

TN: It’s actually not bad to look at this IMF report. We had such a pullback in economies in 2020 that we really have to look at the growth rates in 2019, 2020, and 2021. To understand it in context, Southeast Asia looks to be doing pretty well when we average those three years out. There’s growth in just about every country except Thailand, now with a slight pullback over that time. And so what that means is Thailand will not necessarily back up to the 2019 levels unfortunately, but Malaysia is 1.7%. In Asia, 2.4%. Singapore, 0.38%. So Southeast Asia is growing. Europe, on the other hand, there is only one country that shows growth over that period, which is the Netherlands within the Eurozone. So Europe has a bit of a problem. The US continues to grow, though around 1%.

 

NL: Meanwhile, is the sharp rise in March, U.S. CPI prices compared to February a good sign or something to be concerned about?

 

TN: We didn’t see long term inflation effects and a lot of kind of buzz about long term inflation affects or medium term inflation affects in the US. But our view is that this is two factors. One is the base effect, meaning we saw so much disinflation or deflation in 2020 that we’re seeing a base effect on that. The other one is supply constraint. So we’re seeing hold back in supply chains or we’re seeing supply chains catch up from closure.

 

There is a constrained supply which is driving up prices as supply chains continue to equalize and balance out. We should see those prices return to normal. If we go back to the IMF forecast, we don’t necessarily see rousing growth for 2021 compared to, say, 2019. So we have the manufacturing capacity in place. So I don’t necessarily see demand outstripping supply to create the inflation that many people are talking about.

 

NL: When do you expect the situation will normalize?

 

TN: It really all depends on when countries open up and and that sort of thing. I would do three of twenty one is when we start to see things more normal, I think it’ll work out in between now and then. Of course, currency dynamics have a lot to do with that, but we’ll have to see what happens with the dollar with CNY and the euro to really understand how that will shake out. But we think we’ll see normalization in Q3.

 

RK: The big Wall Street banks have kicked off earnings season with numbers from JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo. They beat estimates, but are these numbers sustainable or just a one off blip following a what was really a tough year?

 

TN: They both did really well in terms of return on equity. And that’s really one of the major requirements for banks. The real question is around loan. So we saw a spike in loans in the middle of 2020 in the US, largely on the back of small business loans and very low interest rates and government programs to push loans out. Loans are down in Q1 of ’21. There is an expectation that loans will perk up again in the second half of ’21. I’m not quite convinced we’ll see the loan growth that was talked about today with JP Morgan’s call. I think we’ll see loan growth in the second half of ’21, but I’m not necessarily sure that we’ll see the spike that we discussed on the call.

 

LM: So Tony, Legacy Cockburn’s and IT companies are both rushing into the electrical electric vehicle space out of these two, who’s likely to come out in front?

 

TN: I think it’s a combination. Car brands make really good hardware, but they’re really not great software makers. So I think there’s going to be a combination of the car brands relying on battery makers and relying on software to make great electric vehicles. There are a lot fewer parts in EVs. And so these supply chains that the car manufacturers had to have for internal combustion engines change pretty dramatically for EVs. They’re going to have to rely on battery makers and software makers.

 

I think the real question for the auto manufacturers is what is that business model going forward? I think they may learn from software makers with the recurring revenue model. So we may take a car and pay a monthly charge for that car, almost like combining finance and the car itself. So carmakers have a recurring revenue model with regular upgrades similar to the way maybe some mobile phone carriers operate, those sorts of things. I think it’s a stretch to have the one time payment. I think carmakers see that finance revenue go to other people and they may want to do that themselves with EV.

 

RK: Out of curiosity, do you have any thoughts on what will define whether a legacy car brand is going to succeed in the new car world? Because a lot of them have been hesitant to move. They’re going to have to make partnerships with the battery mate because they’re going to have to make partnerships with software makers is going to be the two defining parts who they’re putting on the battery and the software name.

 

TN: Yeah, I think it depends on, you know, the first mover is not necessarily the winner. So I think Tesla ultimately, they’re a great company. They make fine cars like every car company. They have problems. But I think they’re fine. It doesn’t necessarily mean they’re going to be the winner. I think with Volkswagen announcing, you know, big moves in the market a couple of weeks ago, say if Toyota really I mean, of course, they’re going after it already. But if there are real moves in that direction, I think the very, very large scale carmakers will ultimately win.

 

A lot of this has to do with regulatory and subsidy regimes within the consumption countries. So it is more expensive to buy an electric car. There is not the infrastructure necessarily to have electric cars to drive long distances. So the subsidies that national governments put out to push that market forward are going to have a major impact on the adoption of those cars.

 

The real danger, I think, is it’s going to take a long time to rollout that infrastructure and other things. So the real danger for the guys who invest in EVs in a big way is a different type of technological change that could come around. I don’t know what that could be. It could be a more efficient internal combustion engine. It could be, you know, I don’t know, a different type of fuel or something that’s a lot cheaper and a lot easier to use.

 

So there are a lot of question marks around the rise of EVs. I don’t necessarily think that it’s guaranteed that EVs will take over and the big car companies are going to go on a percent to electric vehicles.

 

RK: The large scale makers like Volkswagen, Toyota, they’ve got they’ve got essentially a conglomerate of other brands within them. Do you expect to see more consolidation, especially as this? Because the car industry hasn’t been doing well that great over the last few years and we’ve seen more M&A. We should we expect more consolidation, especially after last year?

 

TN: I don’t know how much more there is to consolidate. I think it may get specialized boutique. When you have technology changes in an industry, you always have specialized boutique companies that come around. We saw this in mobile phones, say, 10 or 15 years ago, and those ended up being purchased. So I think we’ll have an era where we’ll have even more TV companies, small ones that end up being bought by the larger guys. So, you know, a technological change really pulls a lot of innovation. Big companies are really not good at innovation, so they typically have to acquire it. Will it Tesla be acquired? Probably not, at least not at this valuation. But other small companies, early stages could potentially if they have very good tech. So I think that’s the way they leapfrog. I don’t think it’s the massive processes that they have internally, like a Volkswagen today. I don’t think that’s the way they leapfrog.

 

LM: Thanks so much for joining us this morning. Tony, that was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, giving us some insight into what’s happening in global markets.

 

RK: So we are talking about cars very quickly. I see this headline here that Jilly’s Lotus cars, miles, raising four billion ringgit.

 

And they’re only doing this to help the iconic British sports and racing automobile brand to expand into the IV market in China, according to people familiar with the matter. And this is a story from Bloomberg. So Geely is working with advisers to slander potential investors interested in funding the round. And that could see that would value good value lotus operations at about five billion U.S. dollars. This is going to be interesting because this is, of course, was formerly part of the Proton Group, which was then bought by Geely.

 

LM: And so so we’re going to be heading into some messages now and then. Up next, taking a look at Mithras financing with financial columnist Pankaj Kumar. Stay tuned. BFM eighty nine point nine.

 

Categories
Podcasts

Synthetic Economy

Tony Nash joins the BFM Morning Run podcast from Malaysia and explained why we have synthetic economy and how to navigate through this. Also discussed are tech stocks — is this the end for them?

 

This podcast first appeared and originally published at https://www.bfm.my/podcast/morning-run/market-watch/synthetic-economy on March 4, 2021.

 

❗️ Check out more of our insights in featured in the CI Newsletter and QuickHit interviews with experts.

❗️ Discover how Complete Intelligence can help your company be more profitable with AI and ML technologies. Book a demo here.

 

 

Show Notes

 

WSN: Nasdaq closed sharply down last night, continuing a trend that sees it almost erased all its year-to-date gains led by declines in Apple, Amazon and Tesla. Is this the end of big tech?

 

TN: I don’t think it’s the end of big tech. I think investors are taking a pause. We saw tech jump a lot in the wake of Covid. Investors are really starting to wonder how much additional growth is there over time. We’ve seen the work-from-home stocks and other things really get lifted through Covid. But how much immediate rapid growth is left is where a lot of the investor questions lie.

 

WSN: Is this also the beginning of a trend where we really see the rotation from growth into value?

 

TN: “Value” is a scary word right now. It has been for a long time. We have a ways to go, but I think we could get there. We’ve been talking for a few months about a pullback in March and we expect the pullback to continue and will begin to recover in late March, April. So we think this has a little ways to go unless there’s dramatic intervention by central banks and other things. But we think this pullback is not ideal but it’s necessary given stretched valuations and stretched expectations. So this is healthy for us. We just need to figure out what to do with it.

 

PS: Just give me another angle that instead of looking at it from values about sector specific, because yesterday, energy and financials did do relatively well. But was the energy upside due to the rising prices? And how does that correlate with OPEC’s decision coming soon with respect to oil production?

 

TN: I don’t think it gets really much more complicated than rising oil prices. These energy companies generally are still extremely bloated, extremely inefficient. Aside from the crude pressurizing, there really isn’t a lot that we see driving it. So we do expect commodities to take a pause. We’ve expected this for some time. We’ve seen copper come down by five percent or something.

 

Over the past few trading days, crude oil has leveled off in general. It’s not rising as fast as it was. Some of this has to do with CNY starting to weaken a bit. Chinese and the U.S. Dollar to start to strengthen their sort of related, but they’re not necessarily one and the same. So as we see some of that, an unraveling of some of that, Kerry, we’ll see some commodities start to come off of it as well.

 

WSN: BDA shows that the U.S. manufacturing grew at its fastest pace in three years. So are we really on the road to recovery?

 

TN: I don’t necessarily think that the economic growth expectations that we’ve seen from economists saying seven percent growth or something like that are necessarily the right way to go. When we look at the growth that we saw in Q4 and the growth that we’ve seen in Q1, I’m not sure we’re already back, at least in the U.S., to where we were before the virus. And so it’s really questionable for an economy that’s been growing one to three percent, depending on the year. Is a seven percent growth rate really warranted? Additionally, when you see things like deflation and the Chinese CPI, those two growth engines, we’re not necessarily seeing the rapid growth that some people have been claiming.

 

PS: Just another angle then, which is employment data, because December, January data didn’t meet expectations. What’s your outlook for February then?

 

TN: It’ll probably be OK. I think if the employment data is extremely positive. The US is susceptible to politicization of macro data just like everyone else. If we see a pop in employment data, I think they would be revised out. All of these macroeconomic indicators are revised three or four times. If we see a pop in a sample of employment data, which they look at a subset of houses and companies, they don’t look at the entire economy. If we see a pop, which we’re not necessarily seeing, we think that would be revised out over time. So I would say be really careful about optimism here. OK, it’s great. I live in Texas. We just announced that Texas one hundred percent open yesterday. All this stuff. It’s great to be optimistic, but we’ve really had synthetically driven growth. It’s not necessarily real growth. It’s all subsidized growth in many, many countries over the last, say, nine to 12 months.

 

WSN: That’s very true because this the twin Goldilocks effect of monetary and fiscal stimulus but somewhat related to unemployment numbers is that if the number is better on Friday, do you think markets might get nervous? Because that’s one of the indicators the feds are looking at to raise rates.

 

TN: We’re in that place where bad news is bad news and good news is potentially bad news. So we really have to be careful. What’s going to happen to Treasuries? Is the Fed going to raise rates? How does all that work if we start going to hot? I think it’s the right question that you’re asking. When we have an equity market and global equity markets that are so stretched, if the cost of money, which is what interest rates are, starts to rise, then we really have to be careful about equity valuations.

 

PS: During a deep dove into a specific sector, which is basically all this office collaboration companies like Zoom and Slack, what’s your outlook for those kind of sectors in the short term and mid-term?

 

TN: It’s good. They’ve grown a huge amount over the past year, but I really think we have to look at what growth is. They’re likely going forward, meaning there is growth. But is it as fast as what we’ve seen over the past year? I think the answer is probably no. They are probably also working on their revenue models to monetize some of the things that they’ve been giving away for free for the past year. Like a Zoom call is free. How do they monetize those things? That’s a serious question, but what are they substitution for and what do they enhance?

 

They’ve been substitution for meeting face to face people in the same office. But as more places go back to work, albeit slowly, they won’t necessarily need that for day to day, although it’ll still be used. Again, my question is the growth will be slower, but I would hope it’s better growth, meaning more monetized growth.

 

WSN: All right. Thank you for your time. That was Tony Nash of Complete Intelligence, giving us his views on markets and a very important point in that all these work from home teams may be the easy money is made because we did see stellar growth. Right, as everyone switch to zoom calls and all these kind of new technology. But now the question is, are we going to really see profit coming in? Is there going to be margin expansion?

 

PS: I want to know how they’re going to monetize and whether they’re going to expand the services beyond what they do. As Tony, you see, a lot of it is kind of free of charge. So what is the business model going to evolve to deliver sustainable profit? It’s a big question mark for me.

 

WSN: Yeah, and one company which hasn’t impressed is actually Snowflake, and that’s a data cloud company. Now, they announce a revenue for fourth quarter, which came in at one hundred and ninety million U.S. dollars, slightly better than the one hundred seventy eight million dollars that was expected. So this represents I mean, it is impressive when you just look at the headline numbers. It represents one hundred and seventeen percent growth year on year. But like as Tony highlighted, this company actually suffers a net loss.

 

So their net loss widened to one hundred and ninety nine million U.S. dollars. That’s more than double that 83 million in the. The same period a year ago.

 

PS: Yeah, I mean, the markets didn’t like it because the stock dropped eight percent on Wednesday. I mean, just a reminder to all of you guys, Snowflake was the largest IPO in 2020. Right. So with respect to guidance, snowflakes specs 185 to 200 million U.S. dollars in productivity in the first fiscal quarter, which is will be up about 90 to 96 percent year on year.

 

WSN: So, yeah, you can be hard on a stock that has a fantastic concept data. Right. Everybody wants that in the clouds. But in a day, patience with investors will run thin if you don’t make money. And that’s the reality of any business. So I think, like you sit like what Tony highlighted those companies where you see stellar revenue growth, but not profit after a while.

 

Market’s not going to tolerate it for that long. And when they issue like a set of results, which are below expectations and widened widening, no losses, no end to that, you know, no no sense of when are they going to turn around. I think you then see that sharp sell down again.

 

PS: And take, you know Tony, said something really interesting. Bad news is bad news. Good news could be potentially bad news.

 

WSN: Is that there is the cup half full or is it half empty? Sometimes the market is like this, the same set of data. Depending on the mood, the sentiment can be viewed either very positively or negatively. So if you get a better data but you’re in a positive mood, you can say, oh, the worst is over, let’s look forward.

 

But if you’re in a bad mood or you think the market’s being pessimistic and resolve, everyone’s like, oh, no more to come. So who knows? But up next, we’ll be speaking to on JinMing MP for Bungay about Malaysia’s economic recovery. Stay tuned. BFM eighty nine point nine.

 

Categories
QuickHit

QuickHit: How robust is the global financial system in the wake of Covid?

This week, we are joined by Seth Levine of the Integrating Investor, a professional investor and investment market blogger, sharing to us his thoughts on the current financial system, central banks, and debt cycles.

 

Seth Levine is the author and creator of the Integrating Investor Blog. Seth is also an avid coffee roaster, who influenced Tony Nash into roasting as well.

 

💌 Subscribe to CI Newsletter and gain AI-driven intelligence.

📺 Subscribe to our Youtube Channel.

📊 Forward-looking companies become more profitable with Complete Intelligence. The only fully automated and globally integrated AI platform for smarter cost and revenue planning. Book a demo here. simplify financial planning.

📈 Check out the CI Futures platform to forecast currencies, commodities, and equity indices

 

This QuickHit episode was recorded on February 19, 2021.

 

The views and opinions expressed in this How robust is the global financial system in the wake of Covid? QuickHit episode are those of the guests and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Complete Intelligence. Any content provided by our guests are of their opinion and are not intended to malign any political party, religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, individual or anyone or anything.

Show Notes

 

TN: We have a new administration in the U.S. We have Jerome Powell, Central Banker who’s been there for a while. We have Janet Yellen coming in as a treasury secretary. But we’re also late in this Covid cycle with a lot of overhang and bad policy decisions. Some people may like them. But we’ve got a lot of things that need to restart. At the same time, we have Europe that is still shutting things down and the ECB and we have demographic issues in Europe. All those sorts of things.

 

I’m really curious about in the financial system, but more specifically, central banks and treasury. What are your thoughts on where we are and where we’ll likely go in the next year or so with those financial system central banks and treasuries, what does it look like from your perspective?

 

SL: The financial system is just a really interesting topic all together because it is a very big word, a very big concept. And it’s an abstraction that a lot of people grasp onto, and some of the work I’ve done a couple years ago, I really tried to untangle that abstraction and concretize it and what I found is that, when we say “financial system,” we’re really just talking about a system of interconnected banks.

 

So at its base, we’re talking about very simple banking. Banking is complicated. But when I think about banking at its core, what is it? It’s really just a carry trade. If you have bank XYZ, you take in deposits and then you try and invest those and earn an asset yield that’s an excess of your deposits. And you keep a little bit in your deposit and you keep a little bit behind for reserves, i.e. liquidity.

 

It’s a leverage system. When we talk about the global financial system, we’re really talking about a leveraged system of interconnected, financial services companies. And that’s what we see on the screen. They’re in the markets for bond stocks, derivatives, all sorts of things and it is giant. Because we not only we have Central Banks. We also have what’s called the shadow banking system. Or some people call it the Euro-Dollar system.

 

So we look at what has happened over the course of my life. I really see this carry trade being squeezed in one direction. The funding side has perpetually been squeezed lower. And what’s that done? The asset side has come down as well. But I see all these like market events, whether it be Covid or the bombing event of a couple years ago or any number of market sell-offs. That is a signal that the market is trying to deleverage.

 

There’s been asset mis-pricing on the market and because we’re levered, again the impact is so much greater so the response out of policy makers has always been to lower the funding costs. If the asset yield is coming down, the funding cost has to come down too to keep that carry trade together. And now as asymptotically reach zero, maybe even going the other way, it’s really interesting to see what’s going to happen with that asset yield because again if there’s a mismatch of any sort, that’s when we can start hitting some turbulence.

 

TN: Do you think we’re hitting that mismatch point? We have a lot of precarious events like right now, whether you’re looking at big events like the demographic handoff from baby boomers to millennials, or if you’re looking at Covid or if you’re looking at some specific corporate events or even cryptocurrencies. There are so many different things happening right now that could mess with that carry trade.

 

SL: If you want to talk about cryptos, that’s a separate conversation. It depends on your time frame. If you look long-term, it’s the millennial taking over from the baby boomer and just a giant debt burden that we’ve amassed and I’ll claim it squarely on the fiat currency regime because again if you look at all fiat currency regimes they tend to go in this direction where the spending gets and the debt load tends to overwhelm the productive capability of the current economy and that is an issue that I think has to resolve and how that resolves, I’m not going to say anything unique here, but I believe there’s only three ways out.

 

You can either inflate it away. You can either restructure the debt or the obligations and in this case would probably mean restructuring social security and medicare benefits or you can repay it or default on it, right, which I think repayment is going to be difficult. And default, I’m not sure we need that considering that it’s a fiat currency and we could print it ourselves and that actually leads into what I think is the war of MMT right now and again, if bitcoin is one bottle of tequila I think MMT is a bad case of it.

 

That’s the draw of that because people are trying to find a way out of this and that’s longer term. If we go back to the more near-term view, I think inflation is really an interesting development here. And when we say inflation, I mean we’re specifically talking about CPI growth.

 

So we get to a point where the CPI is going up and bond yields for whatever reason follow CPI growth up, then let’s go back to that carry trade. Now we’re talking about our funding costs going up and asset yields don’t go up. That’s going to be a problem for the financial system and keeping that carry trade together.

 

However, it’s also how to get the asset yields up. Well the price has to come down. So that I think is a pretty interesting potential risk that we may be facing in the economy unless we can really generate the growth so we can get the asset yield up to match the increase in funding costs.

 

TN: I believe we’re in that very precarious position right now as we look at bond yields rising we look at other things. There’s a lot happening right at this very moment and so if you are a Janet Yellen or a Jerome Powell, what are you thinking about, I mean aside from these big problems we’ve talked about, what kind of tools do you think you’re looking at aside from dump trucks of trillions of dollars? Like, is there a lot… Do they have other options, really?

 

SL: I’m gonna answer this in some really different ways. The stimulus route that most people would like to go to, I actually think that’s counterproductive because I think about stimulus right, as opposed to say QE for example, you’re actually giving money in the hands of citizens. These are not institutions. These are actual citizens who are going to go out and purchase things.

 

So that actually I think puts upward pressure on CPI growth in a way that QE just simply did not, just from a pure mechanical perspective. So if that’s the case, we start seeing… So if you go and unleash some stimulus and then you start seeing CPI growth and then you start seeing bond yields go up, I mean you’re actually exacerbating the problem, right.

 

So my preferred method as a pure capitalist here, if I’m Jerome Powell, if I’m Yellen, I’m thinking of ways to get the asset yield up and I mean like bona fide get the asset yield up and from my perspective that’s purely deregulation and going to as free market and economy as possible. But that to me would be the only way of really getting the asset yield up and the growth up that we need to grow our way out of out of the debt load that we’ve created.

 

TN: Okay, interesting. So what are some of those deregulation paths you’d go down? Like again, the broad swallows of them and and how would you sequence that to not have immediately negative impact on the on everything? What would you focus on and how and when would you focus on it?

 

SL: So this is gonna sound like a punk, but it’s not. I think this is a very specialized issue and there are and they’re probably like really good policy makers, policy experts who can actually opine on this. But the way how I like to think of these problems and I get a lot of criticism for this, but it’s really to me the only way, the best way that I know to think about them is think of the end state, think about where we are now.

 

Like, let’s devise the ideal end state and then once we agree on the ideal end state then we could talk about the strategy to get us from here to there in the least disruptive way possible. So I mean ultimately my end state would involve going to a free banking regime. We’ve tried this throughout history. There’s been periods of it in the US. There’s been, it’s been tried best probably in Scotland. There’s also some in Canada.

 

If you’re looking for resources on free banking, I highly recommend the work of George Seljun and Larry White, definitely the foremost experts on the topic. If I were Jerome Powell, the way how I would go. I would try and think of how to put myself out of a job in a sense, which we know is probably unrealistic and probably doesn’t have a lot of consensus behind it but, that’s the way forward I see. These prescriptions that we’re talking about are going to be financial because we are talking about Jerome Powell who’s the head of the central bank. So he is a banker in the financial system.

 

And Janet Yellen is treasury secretary. I don’t really know how much power she has because she’s just trying to fund the government. If I’m Janet Yellen, I’d probably have to get a little bit shorter and then, maybe try and try and lobby for some deregulation angle and take some of that pressure off me to actually to have to fund a large government with that has a very big reach.

 

TN: Sure. Okay and so when we look at going down that path and we look at say the US Dollar as, like it or not, as a global currency, how do other say central banks or financial systems interact with the US as we would potentially move down that path?

 

SL: Sure. So the dollar is very important in the global financial system. It is the base reserve currency. But right now, all currencies are floating right. So I think perception probably has a lot more to do with it than anything else. At least from a fiat perspective, it ultimately, the buck is going to stop with the strength of the US economy. And it’s going to and that’s with any currency.

 

In order to keep the US Dollar as reserve currency, we need the strongest currency possible. That also means honoring the obligations possible. So that puts a lot more pressure on the inflation prescription and on the default prescription. And really I think leaves you with the growth angle as a way to maintain the Dollar’s importance in the system.

 

TN: It sounds to me like you’re fairly concerned about inflation in the coming years. Is that fair to say?

 

SL: I am sort of a secular deflationist and I am for a couple reasons, and it’s probably none that you’ve ever heard before. One I’m just pro, I’m a big believer in human ingenuity and a lot of this has to do with definition, right.

 

If we’re talking about inflation’s definition, right, it’s… Today, people are talking about CPI growth, right. The rate. So that is just the price of consumer goods and services. Right, I mean, that should fall over time. I mean just no… that is, I mean, that is the way of human prosperity. In fact, the only way CPI growth increases are times during shortages and tough times actually, if you look at the inflation we’re seeing now, right? The CPI growth that is like coming because we are seeing shortages throughout the supply chains, right. And that’s okay.

 

TN: So let’s stop there and let’s talk about that in terms of shortages. Do you think we’ll continue, like are those shortages something that are here to stay, let’s say in the short to medium term? Because like you, I’m a technologist.

 

I started technology for a reason mostly because I’m an optimist. So over the long term I certainly believe that prices go down generally because of innovation. But these supply shocks will say almost, a generalized supply shock, that we’re seeing in the wake of Covid, do you think that will be with us for a sufficient amount of time to have an impact on short to medium term CPI and provide a disruption to that balance that you’ve talked about?

 

SL: That’s an interesting question. I think it’s a matter of time frames because I think longer term, right I mean, you’re in business, I’ve been a bottoms-up analyst for 17 years here. And if there’s one takeaway is there’s no better cure for high prices than high prices. And why is that? Well that’s because businessmen and women innovate, they do bottleneck processes and they find a way to improve productivity and bring those prices down.

 

These Covid shortages I believe are temporary because I believe that we’re gonna see business people innovate and try and meet the demand with as much supply as possible for as low as price as possible and to make simply as much profit as possible for them as well.

 

So I think it’s short-term. I don’t have a way to really gauge how long that’s going to be because quite honestly it’s going to be a very micro-analysis. Are you talking about meat supply or talking about the chip shortages, and you know chip shortages that we’re seeing or are we talking about, you know, what what industry?

 

TN: So right. But in general, you think, it’s pretty short-lived. So we may see a short shock but for the most part where that equilibrium that you talk about can remain.

 

SL: Let’s go back to the financial system right back. How quickly is the bond market going to react? I think that’s probably the most interesting part of this conversation.

 

TN: Treasuries have risen like 33% since feb 1.

 

SL: Treasures have more than doubled, right.

 

TN: Exactly. Yeah. Doubled from zero, right.

 

SL: So from a pretty low base, yeah, the ten years specifically. Investors are forward looking and the question is how are people going to react to the perceived rise in CPI growth? How far will this take it? What are also supply demand imbalances within the financial system?

 

These are very complicated systems with a lot of inputs and I think we all tend to fall for this. We try and we oversimplify these because we hang on to a narrative. Let’s just be blunt. Like, I have no idea where else we’re going to go.

 

TN: I think everybody does. We make this stuff up as we go along, right. So bringing this back to say Yellen and Powell and central bankers, the tools that they have, they’re facing the dilemma of stimulus versus let’s say near-term say CPI inflationary activities. Do you see an easy path for them in the near term?

 

SL: I don’t see them as the main players in this argument at all. The central banker’s job, if you go back to the early central banks, it is just simply to try match the assets and liabilities and keep everything together. How much power does he have to juice the asset yield of the economy, and I would say very little. The proof is in the pudding. When look at how economies have performed over the past couple years, no matter how low they’ve taken, treasury yields, you haven’t really seen,  a boom in GDP at all.

 

It’s completely elusive. That’s just because that’s not within his power even though there’s just this belief out there that if you control the liability side cost then, all of a sudden you can control the asset costs and the only lever in there that gets tweaked with is actually the leverage and I think that’s probably the most dangerous thing.

 

TN: So in the short term, we’ll live belong, it sounds like, as usual. Okay. But in the longer term and I want to wrap this up fairly quickly, it sounds like we have to transfer liabilities from baby boomers onto millennials. Do you see any feasible tools for them to do that in a way, you know, that can happen in an organized, won’t be painless, but a relatively organized way. Or will it have to be some sort of disruption?

 

SL: I think the only organized way to do it is through growth, right. You need to come up with policies and again my biases as a capitalist for many reasons, we may need tothrow an extra case of tequila on the truck to get down that path. So that is a tool set that I think is necessary to tackle these problems.

 

If you don’t bring up the asset yield, then you have to deal with the funding costs and again you’re left with three issues and I think they’re all pretty ugly.

 

TN: Great. Seth, on that optimistic note, we’ll wrap it up. Thanks to everybody for tuning in for this QuickHit. Please subscribe below on the page and we’ll see you for the next QuickHit. Thanks very much, Seth. Thanks.