Tag: Crypto

FTX, crude & crypto, CPI & inflation: The Week Ahead – 14 Nov 2022

Post author By admin
Post date November 12, 2022

Emma Muhleman, Boris Ryvkin, and Albert Marko join us for this Week Ahead episode. We talk about FTX and why it happened. FTX transferred about $8 billion of customer deposits to a trading arm called Alameda, and they lost it. FTX was assumed to be a regulated institution. It wasn’t. So customer deposits evaporated. There was a desperate attempt to merge with Binance. That didn’t happen. FTX filed Chapter 11 on Friday, and then Sam Bankman-Fried apologized as if that just absolves him and makes everything better.

Albert, Emma, and Boris help us understand what happened here and what it means not just for FTX executives, but for markets in the week ahead.

We also saw some selling in crude markets as FTX collapsed. Emma talks us through that and tells us how long the crypto unwinds will impact commodity markets.

Based on the market reaction to Thursday’s CPI print, you may think inflation is solved. CPI seemed to override FTX worries and there was this huge sigh of relief in markets. Not so fast. Boris, Emma, and Albert talk us through the CPI print and where we’re seeing persistent inflation (diesel, food, etc). Will the Feds raise by 50 in December followed by some 25s? How will this affect layoffs across the economy?

This is the 41st 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
Emma: https://twitter.com/EmmaCFA1
Boris: https://twitter.com/BRyvkin

Transcript

Tony Nash: Hi, everyone, and welcome to the Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. Today we’re joined by Emma Muhleman. She’s a macro strategist and if you don’t know her, you’re not on social media. We’re also joined by Boris Ryvkin. He’s with Montefly Holdings. He’s also a former M&A attorney with Skadden and a bunch of law firms, and he was National Security Advisor in Capitol Hill. And Boris has an amazing perspective on macro, on history, on markets. It’s really great to have both of you guys. And we have Albert Marko. You guys know Albert. So it’s just great to have you guys. Thanks so much for being here.

Before we get started, I’m going to take 30 seconds on CI Futures. Our core subscription product. CI Futures is a machine learning platform where we forecast market and economic variables. We forecast currencies, commodities, equity indices. Every week markets closed, we automatically download that data, have trillions of calculations, have new forecasts up for you Monday morning. We show you our error. You understand the risk associated with using our data. I don’t know if anybody else in the market who shows you their forecast there. We also forecast about 2000 economic variables for the top 50 economies globally, and that is reforecast every month.

So we had a lot going on this week, particularly kind of in the second half of the week with FTX. Unless you’ve been kind of on vacation or away, you probably know about this already, but I’ll recap a little bit.

FTX transferred, I think, something like $8 billion of customer deposits to a trading arm, Cart Alameda, and they lost it. FTX was assumed to be a regulated institution. It wasn’t. So the customer deposits evaporated.

There was a desperate attempt to merge with Binance. That didn’t happen. FTX filed Chapter 11 on Friday, and then Sam Bankman-Fried apologized. We’ve got his tweet from Thursday on the screen. He sent another apology out today. And if that just absolves him and makes everything better.

So, Albert, I know you’re a huge fan of crypto, so can you help us understand kind of what happened here? And really, what does it mean not just for Sam, but what does it mean kind of for markets going into next week?

Albert Marko: Well, for Sam, you can look at my shirt. That’s I purpose wore stripes, because that’s where he needs to go to. He needs to go to prison. The crypto space has been just littered with fraud. I mean, just incredible fraud. This guy had the nerve to go up into Congress and talk about transparency and central banks are illiquid and there’s no transparency.

Meanwhile, he’s taking customer deposits, not only just setting it to Alameda, right. But then now there’s a political component of it because he was spreading it around to super PACs for the Democratic, for Democrats.

This is a bigger story than people are alluding onto. On top of that, you had a bunch of Republicans come out and say, why was Gary Gesler helping him get through loopholes in the system?

TN: Was that actually happening? Because I saw that gossip on Twitter, but I’m just not sure if that was actually happening.

AM: Well, yeah, this is political season, so I’m not sure if it actually happened. But you don’t just come say something like that, right? You don’t just make those kind of accusations out of nowhere.

So there’s definitely going to be congressional hearings on this. SBF could be in jail at some point in time.

Concerns of where the customer’s money is. This is not funny. As much as I just absolutely despise crypto, this is not funny when you take people’s hard earned money and put it into different outfits without

any transparency whatsoever.

TN: I hear a lot of comparisons of this to Corzine from, like, 15 years ago. Are there similarities between what Jon Corzine did and what Sam did?

AM: That’s a really good question. I don’t think I can really answer that because we know exactly what FTX actually did with all these funds, where they’re at. Because there are stories that there’s penthouses and condos all over the Bahamas and the Caribbean that they can’t even touch yet. We’d have to find out a little bit more detail of what went on, what transpired into FTX.

Emma Muhleman: Because a lot of the deposits don’t invest in them in illiquid private equity investments, including VC funds that were invested in FTX.

AM: Like Sequoia put in a little bit of money and then they get 500 million back.

EM: Sequoia put in like $420 million that they wrote down to zero.

TN: And they got 500 back? It’s a great deal.

Boris Ryvkin: What was interesting was that Kevin O’Leary, he had a Jim Cramer moment with FTX. He said, if there’s one place where I could feel totally safe and fine, it’s FTX, apparently, because he was confident in their compliance capabilities. Because apparently the CEO was like his parents were like compliance lawyers or something. And he’s probably that’s not one of Mr. Wonderful’s more wonderful calls, I think.

AM: Well, when your parents are compliance lawyers, it just means that they’re going to teach them how not to be compliant and not get caught. That’s what happens when that occurs.

TN: Okay, so what does this mean for crypto generally? I know you’ve been not been a crypto fan for a long, long time. So is this an FTX issue or is this a crypto issue?

AM: This is a crypto issue. This ruins the credibility of any crypto that’s even valid in people’s eyes at the moment. Even Bitcoin is the 800 pound gorilla. There’s other cryptos that are trying to be stable and compliant and everything, and it kills.

TN: Do you know how many crypto pages we’re going to get in the comments to this?

AM: I bring it on because I’ve been telling these people for years that the space has been just a positive scheme after another.

TN: So does this permanently kind of impair crypto, or do you think there’s a time that two or three months from now, everyone forgets about it and people are back in and crypto is back on?

I just think that the crypto excitement is so persistent that I’m just not sure that this hurts it for the long time. They haven’t had that moment yet.

AM: No, not yet. It doesn’t hurt it. Actually, I want to say it actually kind of makes it better because it is weeding out the real problems and showing the problems that are in the space.

But the bigger problem that they have now is one side of credibility is getting retail money into the space. Retail money is just not going to get into the space, and even institutional money is going to have to think ten times more about getting an investment in the future.

TN: So what was it, thanksgiving of 2019, I think, when all the retail money went into the space Something like that, right? We got Thanksgiving coming up here in the States, and we’re probably not going to have the same effect this year.

AM: Oh, God, no.

TN: Are there any other players, do you think, that are likely to fail as spectacularly as FTX has failed?

AM: I don’t think so. At this point, I think that the FCC is going to have to really crack down on the entire crypto space and really force these guys to be compliant with, your know your customer rules and whatnot. So that’s something, actually, Boris could talk about, but I think they’re going to have to do something drastic here with the whole space.

TN: Boris, I guess from a legal perspective, how much do these guys have to worry? Do you think Sam can get away with this?

BR: I just don’t. No, I don’t. I think that, you know, the issue, of course, is just going to be the chain of ownership, first of all, of all, these shell companies. Where’s the money? Where did the money go? Because the money’s gone. I think it was something I know that there were a lot of jokes. He went from 16 billion net worth to a dollar, and he can’t afford his verification badge on Twitter now.

I think there was specifically because he’s now requesting, what, 94 billion as a rescue package. Once you’re already, and today he officially announced today was that they were filing for Chapter Eleven. So that was the official name today after requesting 94 billion, which was already I mean, when you’re already at that point, it means that nobody’s keeping the book.

So first of all, just in terms of any kind of account, whoever the accountant is, if there even was an accountant tied to this, whoever was signing off on this needs to worry a great deal. It’s not just Sarbanes Oxley and everything related to that, but it’s just simply who are these accountants and who was actually keeping these books? Because these numbers that were being thrown out, putting aside that it was impossible for him to get any kind of rescue package that quickly. But that number, it’s a number that is simply not credible.

TN: I’m going to get really boring on you for a second. Most companies have a DOA delegation of authority, right? And so I would think that to transfer $8 billion, the delegation of authority would go up to the board level. Is that fair to say?

BR: Well, I mean, it should, because again, it depends how these companies are actually managed, right? Because these could be not under US law managed, board managed, or there could be LLCs involved here which are member managed or have separate managers or what have you. It should go to the board level.

And in any event, you should have the senior management sign off on the accounts, not just the account. Even though that’s the position with public companies now since Starbucks and everything else. But even when it comes to private companies, to have for sufficient transparency, to really have investors comfort, you would need to have that chain of control.

So the DOA would have to come depending on who actually the board would have to authorize the management to give the DOA either broadly upfront or specifically for a specific transaction as it would happen.

TN: Because of $8 million, that’s still a fair bit of money, right?

EM: There were several acquisitions that he made that were private companies with the tune of over a billion each. So I guess you got like two $1.5 billion private investment, 500 million here. So I guess that’s how that all works out.

TN: You would guess that those have to have board approval at some point, I would think.

BR: I’ve done in the past very discreet deals where it’s sort of like, we’ve already transferred 100 million for this property. Please paper all of that over retroactively.

I’m sure that that’s what happened here. In other words, there was a lot of money moving around, nobody papered over what they needed to paper over. And I would be surprised if there’s actually a chain where all of the documentation that was needed at each stage of the transfer was actually put in place.

I’m certain that money just moved around all over the place, which makes it now very hard to track because there’s going to be a very limited paper trail to find, which is going to be a problem for him and everybody who’s authorized per the corporate documents of these companies for having to move the money around. So it’s going to be multiple levels of potential liability.

TN: Okay, so I would guess also that everyone in every crypto company is probably also coming up with their policies, if they didn’t have them already.

BR: So what are the investors are going to start calling to talk major policies. But I think the bigger issue, and Albert sort of touched on this, is the fact that this is an exchange, fundamentally.

So the issue isn’t we’re talking about Bitcoin as a currency, but if you can’t trust one of the largest exchanges and I forgot that was it, it wasn’t Coinbase, it was one of the others that pulled out of an attempt to that’s a last minute shotgun. Binance. And that has a second and third order effect. So not only did this huge exchange fail, it was such a disaster that the Binance, which is one of the more credible exchanges like Coinbase and what have you, just simply said, you know, this is beyond saving.

So it could really have a cascade effect. I know some are calling it the Lehman moment for crypto, although Albert would say there have already been five or six of those.

TN: Right, well, and before we get too critical of FTX as an exchange, let’s look at the LME and the credibility of kind of traditional exchanges. So, I mean, it’s easy to point the finger at crypto exchanges, but the LME has done some pretty screwy stuff over the years. So I think we need to be really careful

of just saying, well, I know you didn’t say this Boris, but crypto exchanges do screw things. Other exchanges do screw things as well.

EM: might I mention, though, with the LME, they are now under the control of the Communist Party of China via HVX. Great. Who is running the show? Real competent folks at the CCP. Binance is even shiftier if you ask me, but we’ll see.

TN: Speaking of markets and crypto, Emma, can we talk a little bit about kind of markets and correlations? How are we seeing this crypto activity and how do we expect this crypto activity to kind of flow through into other markets, equities, commodities, other things? Obviously it didn’t hit equities yesterday and today, but it seemed to be hitting earlier in the week.

EM: Yeah, just as it was all falling apart, we saw a big risk off move in equities. We saw the Nasdaq coming down, we saw some weakness in oil that may have not had anything to do with the

fundamentals in the oil market. I would venture to guess or argue that it had more to do with the FTX sell off because there were several companies, including pension funds, that had significant exposures in FTX. So that oil related selling around the time that FTX all this broke. It may not have to do with the report, this actual EA report.

TN: So I’ve got a graphic from Tracy’s newsletter earlier this week where she talks about the funds and the investors that were deleveraging in oil because of FTX. BlackRock, Ontario Pension Fund, Sequoia, Tiger Global, et cetera, et cetera.

So there were some big players impacted by this and I can’t believe that it just impacted oil. I also have a hard time believing that it was a one time, say, 48 hours event.

EM: Yeah, I would think that. Not having done any diligence for a pension fund, Ontario Pension Fund,

like for BlackRock. I mean, I don’t want to call out too many names. We all know what SoftBank is about. They were intimately involved. There’s going to be a lot of problems and a lot of spillover that we’ll just have to wait.

TN: At the end of the day, I hate to say “only”, but in terms of global fund flows, it’s only $8 billion of retail money that was lost. It’s I say “only”, but, you know, it’s not a huge amount in terms of flows, but I just don’t know how much is in these funds themselves.

AM: Yeah, you don’t know how much the funds have lost and what they’re trying to make up and like yeah, sure, 8 billion doesn’t sound a lot, but in a market that’s so illiquid with a lot of these funds blowing up right now, it can be a lot. You don’t know what they’ve leveraged off of it.

EM: And what they might be being forced to sell as a result.

TN: So we probably haven’t seen the end of that. Fair to say?

EM: We’ll see a long restructuring or not restructuring Chapter Eleven. Not a restructuring, but a liquidation.

TN: Yeah, it’ll be liquidation.

AM: Discovery will be fun. See where all this money went to.

TN: Great, that’d be great. Okay, perfect. Anything else on markets and FTX and crypto? Are we looking at is this impacting, say, European markets or Asian markets? Since crypto has been so big in Asia, are we seeing impacts in Asian markets, like in China?

AM: I don’t think so. I think that’s really Binance’s territory at the moment. Right now, I think FTX was solely the US and Western Europe.

EM: I would think you would see an impact on Japanese investors as well, who own a lot. But just like, not the kind that puts out life insurance companies or puts you a lot of business, but more like retail investors getting screwed.

AM: retail investors have just been taking it on the chin for the last 18 months. It doesn’t stop. 30 years.

BR: Except for Warren Buffett and those who invest with him because yet again, everyone’s underwater, he’s up like 2.3%.

TN: Boris, say, can you talk us through the CPI print this week? Because it seems like CPI, the rate of rise of CPI slowed. CPI didn’t slow, but the rate of rise of CPI slowed. And so it feels like it kind of overrode the FTX worries and there was this huge cyber relief in markets for the past couple of days that we’ve kind of conquered inflation. And the Feds only going to raise by 50 in December, and then after

that we have some 25s. What’s your sense of that? Do you feel like kind of inflation is conquered? Is that base effects? Is that kind of core inflation coming down? What does that seem like to you?

BR: Yeah, I don’t think that it’s conquered. I mean, what’s interesting to me is sort of the degree to which all that matters is what the Fed may or may not do and trying to price in factional differences within the Fed. That’s how granular it’s now become. Because I think the markets were waiting for any reason, anything, to cling onto for Powell to reverse course and to after his very hawkish last meeting, where he said, ignore all of the pivot talk.

Essentially, you know, we’re going to continue to do this as effectively as long as it takes to see a sustained reduction in inflation over that’s defined. So he essentially was very angry and Albert and I were talking about this as well, that he was very angry by some of the Pivot talk from brainer than some other people yelling, was saying certain things. It looked like some of the more devastated member. And then Powell comes out and basically says, I don’t know what you’ve heard about any Pivot talk, we’re going to stay the course until we see more evidence of multi quarter reductions and declines in inflation.

But it looked like the market really was desperate to find a reason to not believe them and to hope that anything that might persuade him to in other words, the market is looking for anything to latch onto to have a pivot, even if we don’t actually get one.

So initially it was the official position, if you were even to read the kind of the superficial financial media was they were worried if we focused on the red wave, that was what was going to get the relief rally. Then we forgot about what was happening with the midterms. And now we have this softer inflation report that as you said, to slowed the rate while most of the slowdown was because of on energy, used cars and a couple of these other, in my view, short term fluctuations which are, I mean, to the extent that CPI has already been massaged to death.

Obviously the listeners of this podcast of course know that very well. If we measure inflation how it used to be measured from the 1970s on, we’d be in double digits. I mean, that’s just a fact. So taking even to the extent that they were able to massage it, what I saw here was the market latching onto the top line figure, hoping that this would block the Fed into doing what the markets want the Fed to do, rather than actually looking at what’s happening to the core and actually looking below the hood and the underlying trend.

That’s what I’m seeing. You also can’t have to take into account biden’s political depletion of strategic petroleum reserve. You have to take into account the unseasonably milder sort of late fall that we’ve been having, I think that’s been having an impact on natural gas prices which have this very sharp decline and now have rebounded a little bit.

Certainly that’s coming out of Europe as well, but I’m not seeing anything fundamental that would actually allow us to conclude peak inflation and sustained reduction inflation has been achieved. So I’m not saying that when it comes to energy, I’m not seeing that when it comes to food, I’m not saying that. I mean, the housing market is not doing well. I’m not seeing any fundamental changes in the housing market. Really. This to me seems like a short term story and the market overreact, in.

TN: My view at least, this is that’s great. So I’ve got on screen Sam’s from Sam Rines newsletter, the core CPI and all CPI items, just showing a bit of turnover there. So it could be encouraging to people who like lines. Right.

But if we look at the target rate probabilities for the Fed, which is the second item on the screen, it does look like we have from a 4.5 almost to a 5.5 target rate.

So that shows there may be ongoing tightening, say maybe into Q one, if we don’t see a dramatic continued decline in the rate of rise of inflation. Is that fair to say?

BR: Yeah, I think so. I think that it seems that the growing chorus is shifting from do what continue as long as it takes to fear of overtightening, at least outside of Powell and maybe one or two other people. And Albert really, I think, is the resident expert on FOMC, inside of baseball on that and sort of thinking, et cetera.

But once that rhetoric shifts to fear of overtightening, that tells me that they’re looking for any excuse to stop and to begin moving back. And that will just bring the inflation genie back out. Because again, these policies are being set by people who don’t fundamentally understand what inflation is and isn’t and what’s causing the inflation. So they’re looking at the wrong things still, in my opinion.

So none of the fundamentals that I’m seeing, as I said, that would really drive a sustained reduction in inflation have changed in that direction. And once if they do decide, as you said, Tony, if they do continue to tighten into the first quarter and then decide to do a sharp 180, that’s going to just bring everything back, if not make the situation even worse.

So they’re in a very difficult position and I think, as I said, there’s a lot of political pressure for them to move back, especially given what’s happening with these midterms, certainly on the part of Yellen and the bike administration. But I think maybe Albert can also chime in.

TN: Let’s talk about the Yellen Fed factor and also since she’s a labor economist, Albert, let’s wrap some of these layoffs that happened this week into that discussion.

AM: How coincidental that these layoffs come right after Midterms and after Yellen has done everything in her power to keep equities up so they don’t have to have layoffs until now. Well, now all the layoffs are coming. Like we’ve talked before, they’ll do this right before Christmas.

But also on the CPI and the inflation front, there are two glaring problems that they’re staring at the moment right now. How’s y’all going to deal with the Chinese reopening in March? Because that’s going to be really announced in February. They did a little bit about real estate today. They talked a little bit about real estate supporting the real estate market. And every Chinese name that was on my screen was up by 7%.

And then you talk about oil and then we have a big diesel shortage in New England at the moment and it’s leaking down all the way into the Southeast. And those are just going to add to costs across the board. And I don’t think that they understand how bad inflation can really get. They can only suppress it for so long with SPR releases and whatnot. But it’s coming to a head and I don’t think that Paul is going to be able to release. I think he’s going to have to do another 75 again.

EM: The thing that’s just disturbing to me about that is that, like, for instance, we are going to have a serious diesel shortage coming here currently and it’s only getting worse. Powell cannot fix that problem. So let’s just shoot the consumers even more like his policies. They’re not helping. Unless you want to completely destroy the economy and have a complete disaster blow up with Deleveraging and the whole shebang.

TN: Default rate in auto loans this week. Right. I can’t remember the percentage of people who were two months behind in auto loans.

AM: Skyrocketing wastelouses start kicking into that, too. Started kicking in. But just to touch on what Emo is saying about Powell trying to kick the teeth into the consumers from his perspective, he’s trying to do the right things, but he’s just not getting any help from yelling or other members coming out there talking about pivots.

TN: What would that look like? Help from Yellen. What would that look like?

AM: Well, she can drive the dollar down to Dixie. That rallies the markets pretty easily.

EM: Well, he doesn’t want a market rally, right? She can help.

AM: Powell does not want a market rally. Brainer and yelling did want to market rally for the midterms. So this is the problem that they have. There’s a civil war within the Fed and treasury that is just making these policies look even stupider than usual. And I know Powell is going to get the brunt of it because he’s the Fed chair, but he only has two other members that are on his side. The rest of them are against them. So he doesn’t really have much of a choice. He’s going to have to do 75 in December.

TN: Well you say he’s going to have to do 75 in December.

AM: He’s going to have to do 75 because we have a CPI print coming out December 14. It’s probably not going to be as nicely massaged as this one was. And on top of that he’s running out of time because the Chinese look like they’re going to stimulate in February, March.

TN: Yeah, you’re right. I agree with the timing on China opening and Chinese stimulus in the meantime is going to be really ugly in China. Do you think that it’s possible that there’s some sort of regulatory relief especially for energy that allows, eventually allows more US. Supply, this sort of thing? Or are we too far down that path with the current administration?

AM: Me and Boris are bred from DCP, the Beltway guys, we’ll just laugh at anyone with the notion that think that anything is going to get done legislatively in the next two years.

TN: Okay, but nothing getting done legislatively is not terrible, right? At least we know the rules of the game and their content.

AM: Yeah, it’s not if there wasn’t problems but there’s glaring problems everywhere and things need to get fixed. So you need something from progress.

TN: Okay, let me throw this out to you guys. We have seen a little bit of move on CPI, whether it manipulated or not. We all kind of know it’s always in there a little bit. But what’s the timing on inflation coming back into a reasonable area? Let’s say five to six, I don’t know. Are we a year, two, three years from that, six months from now? What do you guys think? Emma, what do you think?

EM: If we’re ignoring energy and then we’re ignoring fertilizer prices and food prices, we’re looking at goods, those we may see services come down and wait the wage issue come down a little bit. Just like we’ve seen with auto delinquencies, used cars, these sort of things. You see numbers starting to roll over as demand destruction and liquidity has been pulled.

But I think you’re going to see the opposite in energy and you’re going to see diesel shortages which pushes goods prices up. Right. If every trucker in the nation has to spend a time for every time they fill up with diesel and they can’t even fill up enough, then there’s going to be not only a shortage of goods but goods prices will less go up.

I don’t see how we fix that situation. We only have extra finding capacity. It takes like 30 years to build a new one so I don’t see how that gets fixed. So that’s something that really looks like it would push inflation upwards. So if we add all that together, I’d say we’re going to have a problem with inflation for good at least another year if we include energy and food.

TN: OK, let me ask this. That’s a great answer. Let me ask this divorce, because I know I’m going to get an answer that doesn’t agree with what I think is there pressure to broker a Russia Ukraine piece? And if that happened, would that alleviate some of these diesel price issues?

BR: I think that there is. I know that Orban, for example, and Erdogan met and basically said to Zelensky’s, time to use this window of opportunity to start negotiating. So they liberated Kirstan today, which was.

They liberated Kirsten today, which was the one major city that the Russians were able to occupy and they were offensive earlier the year. So this is kind of a huge move with the Russians on the back foot. And these are people who are everyone is playing all sides.

And Orban, of course, is more kind of the one European leader that’s closest to Putin major leader. But I don’t think that the US is. I know that there was some discussion from the Biden administration about don’t be so categorical about Zelensky, about saying you’re not going to negotiate with Putin. It’s irritating African countries, South America, et cetera.

You have to start taking advantage. I don’t think there’s any pressure and will be in the near term, and especially after these midterm results, I think that the risk of any major, immediate cutoffs in military economic aid from the US to Ukraine are going to be somewhat subdued now, given the kind of the risk from right and left. So I don’t think there’s going to be any nearterm pressure on the Ukrainians right now to start looking at essentially trading land for some kind of an intermediate piece.

But as a side issue, there was some in terms of alleviating the diesel and the gas problems, especially in Europe, there was some discussion about Erdogan purchasing Russian gas at a discount and essentially creating an alternative for the Europeans through that pipeline that was being built basically through the Black Sea, et cetera.

And there was a lot of kind of talk in the US and some European capitals like Erdogan is going to save us because he’s playing everybody and he’s going to create a new gas hub in Turkey, as he declared with the Russian gas. What he’s actually going to do, and Albert and I were talking about this too, in my opinion, is because of Turkish elections next year, he’s going to keep the discounted gas, sell it at home, domestically cheaply, in order to drum up support for his reelection next year. He’s not going to resell that to the European.

So that life raft is not going to be sailing. So therefore, I think that unless there is some relief from the weather, I’m not seeing any, because I know that at that moment, because the weather was unseasonably warm to a large extent, you have this natural gas flood in Europe now, which has driven down natural gas price, at least in the short term.

Dutch and et cetera, the benchmark. But I don’t think that’s necessarily going to sustain. I think we could have a colder winter and Erdaman is not going to provide that relief. I know the Ukrainians are looking at alternatives themselves, but the Ukrainian economy doesn’t exist anymore, really.

Right now, we’re basically balancing their budget through direct cash transfers at the moment. I think it’s only going to be bad news and it will reinforce what Emma has said about her predictions about the diesel shortage and about just energy in general and how that would impact inflationary changes. So I’m not seeing any major improvement.

And also, in terms of the broader discussion on inflation, I also agree that, again, kind of what I said before to dovetail off of that, like, none of the fundamentals to reduce inflation have improved, have changed markedly. So we could be, it’s really, to me, a risk tolerance for recession on the part of the Fed.

When will the Fed decide that if they’ve given up on a soft landing, then we’re going to have one projection in terms of when inflation is going to start coming down dramatically. If they still are insisting on the fantasy of a soft landing, then there will come a point where they might decide.

Regardless of what happens with inflation, recession is a much bigger problem. And we’re going to have to, sooner than we had hoped, begin to pivot, which is probably not something that Powell would want to do, but that’s a recession versus a soft landing versus hard landing balancing act that they’re, I think, going to have to perform over the next couple of quarters.

And I think that’s sort of their near term focus and to kind of close that point off. Right. I mean, I think that the layoffs and I mean, the fundamentals are cooling, the economy is slowing. We’re seeing that with the layoffs, the housing market is going to get worse, in my opinion. Oh, yeah, it’s a disaster.

TN: Look at the MBS holdings at the Fed. They’ve just started to tighten them. They’ve just started. Right.

BR: But then you also have to take we talked about you said auto defaults for auto loans. What about credit card debt, consumer credit card debt? And also, what about the leverage that’s on the books of these companies? Why is the tech, which is tech at the tip of the spear? Why are we seeing all of them down 70%, 60, 70% on the year? Why are we seeing the layoffs hit tech massively? First, because they grew too much too quickly and are over level.

EM: They did refinance in 2021 when they had a chance. So they’ve got like a couple of years.

BR: I don’t know who’s advising Zuckerberg here and his colleagues. I think what we’re going to do is we’re not going to refinance, we’re going to double down on Meta, which we don’t really know what to do with and we’re going to double up on the head count dealing with Meta, on the Metaverse thing, that isn’t getting adopted the way that we would want it adopted. It’s like everything, every mistake that could possibly have been made from the financing to the head count to the rollout, and that’s happening across the tech sector, but we’re financing.

TN: Would you have done differently? I would have taken on all that too, because it was fun. I’m kidding. But I actually think that there are more rounds of layoffs in tech coming. I don’t think this is the only round. I think that in the auto sector, tony and auto and other guys.

So I think I was in Silicon Valley in 1998 to 2001. I know that’s ancient history, but my company went through six rounds of layoffs. I didn’t know when I say my company, the company I worked for, they went through six rounds of layoffs.

So I think all these stories about people at Meta thinking they were going to dodge it and all this stuff, I don’t think that I don’t think this is the only one. I think they’re going to have to do more in three to four months.

I think you’re going to see more companies bandwagon on top of this to say, hey, Meta is doing it and Stripes done it and all these other guys are doing it. So let’s use this opportunity to become more productive and we’re going to see a flood of these before the end of the year. Just a flood. I think the tech sector is going to be wrecked in terms of employment.

AM: Oh, yeah, without question. Even going back to your previous point about the Ukrainians and the Russians getting some kind of peace agreement, even if they did, that would solve the diesel problem overnight.

Even if they did that today, it would take a year, maybe 18 months until all that got rolling in again if they looked at the sanctions, because they still have to go through that whole process for all the countries.

EM: Russia doesn’t send us diesel heavy crude and then we have to process it at refineries, which are running at max capacity. Hence the crack spreads being so wide, we can only convert so much crude into distillates, which diesel of which is one of which jet fuel for planes is another, but both things that cost a lot of money when the prices of the input key input goes up.

TN: Okay, great. Let’s do just a really quick round the week ahead. What are you guys looking for for next week? Albert, you go first.

AM: I’m actually going to look at to see what the House majority and Senate majority makeup comprises of and whether the markets are going to react negatively towards it. Because if the Republicans, I know they’re going to take it, but when they get announced that they take the House, the stimulus packages all but die at that point for two years. So I’m very curious to see how the markets react to that.

EM: I’ll be continuing to watch what’s going on in Crypto to see if anything’s happening with Bitcoin ethereum, because we’ve already seen a lot of other tokens just literally, basically go to zero. So just see how that continues to play out.

TN: Great. My $20 a DOJ is still at, like, three times where I bought it at, so I’m just holding on to it just to see where it goes.

EM: And then I’ll also, obviously, as usual, be watching China and certainly the bank of Japan and just the end period.

BR: Yeah, like Albert, the makeup in Congress and also going to be looking at some of the emerging markets. I think maybe if we’re going to get more evidence out of China as to when they’re still pursuing COVID Zero, I think they’re now recording again, like, a record high number of cases from April. It’s not working yet. They’re continuing to double down and reward everybody who’s pursuing that.

So I want to see if they’re going to continue with that and they’re going to be on track for what Albert said to reopen early next year or if it’s just going to get worse. So that’s what I’m going to be focused on.

TN: Yeah. You’ve heard of the great league forward, right? I mean, these don’t really take sound policy advice. When they get their mind on something, they just push it and push it and push it until it harms everybody they can.

EM: I often when you’re trying to when you have, like, the worst debt crisis ever and the population that’s, like, you know, put the equivalent of $50,000 down on apartments, like, millions of people have done that, and they’ve got nothing to show for it, and you want to keep them from acting out and protesting in the streets. It’s pretty convenient to have them all segregated where they’re not communicating. I wonder really what the motivation behind COVID Zero is. And so I don’t know if I buy that it’ll ever end until it’s convenient for it to end economy wise, where she feels no threat.

TN: I don’t necessarily disagree with you. I think things in China don’t necessarily end until they want them to end. Right. And if you look at exports from China to the US. They’re back up to preCOVID levels now. So in terms of that export machine in China, it’s humming, right? So there’s not feeling economic pain, at least in terms of trade.

So if they’re comfortable feeling the domestic economic pain, then why would they stop? So I think what Albert talked about is Code Zero ending in March, and he and I’ve talked about that a couple of months ago as well. I think that’s the best case. So I think there’s a best case that they end it and they stimulate in March, but it’s quite possible it continues going on because there may be social reasons, there may be other reasons to not open up.

So I don’t think, as westerners, we can look at the Chinese government necessarily and understand the perspective they have on policy and the reasons they have for policy. There is so much inside of Jungkonghai and all of the different things that happen that we just can’t look at it rationally and say they should do A, then B, then c, and very few Americans can look at that and understand why and how it’s happening. You may be exactly right.

EM: Yeah. It’s not a logical I mean, it’s more like if I’m she or if I’m trying to do this, it’s not really like what westerners typically associate as logical things to do economically. It’s more like it’s possible.

TN: Yeah. Anything’s possible. Guys, thank you so much. I really appreciate the time you took to talk through this. Have a great weekend. And have a great weekend. Thank you so much.

Podcasts

More Cryptocurrency Firms in Danger

Post author By admin
Post date July 2, 2022

This podcast first appeared and was originally published at https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w172ydpfbz0vnx1 on June 30, 2022.

As markets tumble, users are left unable to withdraw from some exchanges, and a leading hedge fund prepares to enter liquidation. Is crypto in terminal decline? Scott Chipolina, correspondent for the Financial Times, says investors are well used to challenging conditions.

Sri Lanka is among the countries to be worst hit by inflation, and living standards are falling. Joseph Stalin of the Ceylon Teachers’ Union, and Steve Hanke from Johns Hopkins University, tell us why a solution may be some way off.

It’s a host’s worst nightmare: an out-of-control party in your Airbnb. As the platform cracks down on gatherings, we hear the story of a rental gone wrong in the Bahamas.

Also on the programme, a boss at H&M explains why leaving Russia was a tough decision; and it’s happy 15th birthday to Apple’s iPhone.

We’re joined throughout Business Matters by financial consultant Jessica Khine in Malaysia, and economist Tony Nash in Texas.

Show Notes

BBC: Tony Nash, the CEO at the finance forecasting platform, complete intelligence in the US. State of Texas. How’s your day been, Tony?

TN: Great, thanks very much.

BBC: Good to hear. All right, well, thank you for joining us too. Tony Nash in Texas. I wonder what’s your overview of all this? I mean, it’s obviously bad news for crypto investors, but is it also a warning for other people who might have been entertaining the idea of getting into the crypto market?

TN: Yes, it is. The whole kind of crypto fallout that’s happening right now, it’s not the funds that I worry about. It’s the individual investors who have been investing in crypto that really worry me. And that’s the really kind of sad part of this crypto kind of drama is you have crypto assets that have fallen by 70%. People have put their savings and their hard earned money into crypto. And so I do worry about those guys because there are a lot of people, individuals who have lost a lot of money because they believed the narrative about crypto.

BBC: And I think during the pandemic, we saw a lot of people sitting at home starting to think, oh, maybe I’ll give this a go. They’re the most recent entrance into the market. I guess they’re the biggest losers.

TN: They are. So I did have a crypto journey where I invested in something called dogecoin, and I bought it at like four cents, and I ended up selling it at like 68 or $0.70, something like that. So it was just a small amount of money I didn’t want to put very much at risk, but I did, I wanted to understand what that was like, so I put like $50 into it or something like that and then just saw it go up to $70 or something and then sold it. But I think a lot of people thought that it would continue going up not just dogecoin, but a lot of the cryptos. So it’s not like your guest said, I don’t think this is the end of crypto. It is what they call crypto winter, and it’s probably going to last a couple of years. I don’t think we’re going to see crypto bouncing back immediately.

BBC: Presumably that experiment was enough for you. You’re not tempted to get back in, given the latest news?

TN: I don’t like volatility that much. At least with those assets, like your guests said, there’s nothing underlying those assets. There’s not a company, there’s not a physical commodity. There’s nothing underlying them. It’s just trust. And so I can sell sales in my excel workbook and have the same amount of assets underlying as any crypto asset does.

BBC: Listening to that in Texas, do you agree? Did governments like the US. Government make a mistake with all those support programs?

TN: I think they did, but I respect Steve. Thank you a lot. I follow him on twitter. I think they did make a mistake, but I honestly think that governments at the time were just afraid. I don’t think it was necessarily intentional that they overstimulated. I think they were not aware of what was going to happen around the corner, and I think they panicked. They were just afraid. It’s easy to look back from this point in time and say what they did was wrong and other stuff, but I actually think giving them the benefit of the doubt and saying they just panic, they were afraid and they didn’t want people to starve or suffer or lose jobs or whatever, and they stimulated way too much in hindsight.

BBC: Tony is this enforceable from Airbnb, do you think? Can they really stop people having parties? What if they just clean up really well the next day?

TN: Well, I think part of what happened through the pandemic is a lot of Airbnb hosts started charging exorbitant cleaning fees. And no matter how clean or dirty you left the place, the cleaning fee was applied to your Airbnb fee. I stay in Airbnb, or did stay in Airbnbs pretty regularly, but the cleaning fees became so large that I won’t stay in them anymore.

BBC: I didn’t realize the cleaning fee was at the prerogative of the host. I imagine it was like a blanket 10% or something.

TN: No, they’re huge. And so I have no issue with Airbnb enforcing a no party’s rule, but they really have to have a trade off and put a cap on the cleaning fee for Airbnb hosts because they in some cases are as much as the nightly rental.

BBC: Oh, wow.

TN: And these are things that you don’t see when you do a search in Airbnb and you see a nightly price, it does not include the cleaning fee. So if Airbnb is to put on this ban on parties, they really need to put some pressure on their hosts to reduce the cleaning fees.

BBC: It is a kind of fine line, though, isn’t it? I mean, I’ve had friends rent Airbnb and there’s been a few of us and there’s been drinking, but I guess what they’re talking about is when you invite strangers, or not necessarily strangers, but people who are not staying the night or booked in to stay, that’s when it becomes a party. Is that how they’re going to define it, do you think? Tony

TN: Yeah, I don’t know. If I’m staying in an Airbnb and I want to have some people over for dinner, is that a party if I want to cook for some friends and have them over? I don’t know. I think it could be, obviously loud music, drunk people, that sort of thing. Of course that’s a party, right? So they have to define it. I’m not a lawyer. I’m sure they can find a way to define it legally so that fees can be kept or whatever.

BBC: Tony you’re in Texas, not far from California. Have you heard of this issue before of land being seized from African American owners? I must admit it’s the first time I’ve heard of it.

TN: I’ve probably seen it in movies. I’ve seen it elsewhere. I think I’ve run across it, but I don’t remember it. But when I read this story today, it was great. It was great to hear and really interesting to dig into the story. And it was terrible that people had to suffer with that for 80 years.

BBC: It does say a lot, though, doesn’t it? If neither you nor I, you’re there in the States, have heard of this issue, I mean, from what Alison was saying, this wasn’t the only case. Has it been underreported, do you think?

TN: I don’t know. I don’t know how much property African Americans were allowed to hold before a certain point in time. I’m just not really sure. My family that settled in New Amsterdam when the Dutch still ruled America, had some property that was seized by the British in 1671. So it happened.

BBC: How did you find that out?

TN: We know our family history pretty well, but this was land in lower Manhattan, right around where Wall Street is, and so it was seized. These things happen. I’m not in any way trying to take away from the racial injustice that was done in California, not at all. But these things happen occasionally, and I’m just glad that these guys could get their land back and benefit from it eventually.

BBC: Tony, you’ve been looking at hmmm. We’ve been hearing there about its planned expansion into Latin America, but at the moment you’ve been looking at where their product is sourced. And we were just speaking about Myanmar. It’s Myanmar, sure.

TN: Yeah. Asian sources quite a lot in Myanmar. And part of the problem they’re facing is a lot of the manufacturers in Myanmar are being driven to insolvency because of energy prices. And so H and M doesn’t only have a problem generating revenue to replace Russia, but they do have a supply chain sustainability problem with matching the costs they can get in Myanmar, but also replacing that manufacturing pretty quickly as those manufacturers are driven to insolvency.

BBC: Tony, listening to that, how much has the iPhone changed your life, do you think?

TN: I have never owned an iPhone.

BBC: Smartphone. Do you own a smartphone?

TN: I do. Yeah. Of course I do.

BBC: So do you think iPhone opened the door to that?

TN: Of course it did. But I just never got into the Apple ecosystem. And I just haven’t owned an iPhone anti Apple. I just haven’t been I’m just waiting for it to get a little better. But of course, it’s influenced phones and it’s influenced the way we engage with technology. And it was a great product at the time. It was revolutionary. I remember I was using a Nokia phone at the time. Keep in mind, this is 2007, and you could play your music on that phone and have conversations, and I thought that was pretty cool. But that was before the iPhone came out. The navigation the interface. Everything just really changed the way people interact with phones. It’s great.

BBC: I think that’s all we have time for on this edition of business matters. Thank you so much to Tony in Texas and Jessica in Malaysia. And thanks to Joanna Stern from the Wall Street journal, who brought us up to date on iPhone’s 15th birthday as well. This has been business matters with me, Vivian Nunes. Thanks for listening. Bye.

Tags African, airbnb, American, Apple, BBC, bbc business matters, bbc podcast, bbc sounds, bbc world, bbc world service, California, Crypto, crypto currencies, Crypto currency, cryptocurrencies, cryptocurrency, Dutch, Myanmar, texas

Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 30 May 2022: Does this relief rally have legs?

Post author By admin
Post date May 28, 2022

We’ve had a big week in markets. The S&P is up 5 percent. We’re looking at whether this rally has legs, where’s the volatility, and if the recession is canceled? Also, we have a shorter trading week next week due to Memorial Day on Monday in the US. What’s to expect in 4 days?

Key themes:

Does this relief rally have legs?
Where’s the volatility?
Is the recession canceled?
What’s ahead for next week?

This is the 20th 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 experts on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Sam: https://twitter.com/SamuelRines
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon

Time Stamps

0:00 Start
1:10 Does this rally have legs?
1:58 When will the tail end?
2:40 Crypto has no participation in the rally
3:31 Why tech is still weak?
3:52 Why tech is so subdued?
5:00 What to expect in the options market in the next 4 weeks?
6:42 Durable goods chart from Sam’s newsletter.
8:52 Layoffs in tech, will it continue?
11:30 Will investors and analysts become tougher on companies as we normalize?
13:55 Will we have a recalibration of valuation expectation if there is no recession?
14:34 What to watch out in the 4-day trading week?

Listen on Spotify:

Transcript

TN: Hi, everyone, and welcome to The Week Ahead. This is Tony Nash and I’m joined by Sam Rines and Albert Marko today. We’ve had a big week in markets. The S&P is up 5 percent.

So we’re going to look at a few topics today. First, does the relief rally have legs? We’re also going to take a look at volatility and the recession. Is the recession canceled? What’s happening there? We’ve heard a lot of talk about that. And finally, we’re going to look at the week ahead. So what do we expect for the short week ahead in the US? We have a holiday here in the US on Monday. So what do we expect for Tuesday to Friday in US trading?

So let’s go to you with this relief rally. What’s your thought on this? Does this relief rally have legs?

AM: In short? No, not really. The Fed uses many tools to produce rallies. A lot of it is coming. This week was short covering. Previously, what you’ve seen, especially when during a holiday season, holiday hours, whereas like when I was trading, a lot of liquidity out there is they actually serve the market. They did this over Thanksgiving. They did this over Christmas. If you go back and look at the charts, those 4800 prints were done over holiday trading hours. It’s easy for them to do it. Does it have legs? Probably not.

TN: So legs. Does the tail of this last few days next week, or is Friday the last kind of really interesting day we see for a while?

AM: Well, they have a tendency to figure out what the Bull bear line is, and I think it’s at 4250. Don’t be surprised if Tuesday we’re in the 4200 pushing that line. That’s when the put options are absolutely just completely obliterated after today, for sure, by Tuesday. And then people start getting bulled up. Once they get bulled up, they just pulled the rug.

TN: Sam, what do you think?

SR: Well, I think it’s really interesting that you saw this rally and you had basically no participation in crypto. Crypto tends to be tip of the spear type risk. If you really want to put some significant risk on in a portfolio, you go ahead and buy crypto. That’s just what you do.

So I think that’s a fairly telling sign that, yes, there is a rally underway. And if you look at it, oil is ripping right now, particularly some of the smaller producers. So you are getting some of the underlying stuff moving, but you’re really not having that tip of the spear, real risk type move that you would really want to see for some sort of sustained long-term risk-on type rally.

TN: And we saw guys in Nvidia really take a hit this week. Granted, it’s coming back a little bit, but tech is still weak. And so we’re not seeing some of those risk names really come back.

AM: Yeah. What’s interesting and this goes into the next topic is how are they rallying the market if tech’s not running.

TN: Right. So let’s talk about that. Why is volatility so subdued? I’m not really sure. So we’ve got a chart for the VIX up on the screen. So can you talk us through it’s the lowest point it’s been since Covid. So what’s going on there?

AM: Yeah. So the question is how could it be at a three-year low with such bad news out in the market? Raising rates, Fed sitting there talking Armageddon when it comes to the markets, bad news, bad earnings, everything is going wrong. How possibly could this thing be at the three or low?

Well, they keep it there on purpose to sit there and subdue the VIX. Well, now the VIX is at what, 28? I believe it is right now. But really, they could probably take this to 22 and use that to rally the market rather than tech. But, man, I’ll tell you what, you got to be very careful because the VIX at 22, and if they start rallying the market at that point, 4250 is could be the tip of the iceberg. You know what I mean?

TN: Oh, yeah. I guess my question, Albert, is the VIX measures S&P options for the next 30 days. Right. And so what it’s telling me is that the options over the next four weeks aren’t expecting a dramatic downward move. So are they just playing in that options market to make sure that it looks pretty orderly or what exactly is happening?

AM: Oh, yeah. They’re creating a story. They’re creating a narrative and tell you, hey, it’s time for you guys to get bulled up. Okay. Their objective is to erase excess money out the system and to give us a soft landing. They have said this much to Sam’s point, which he’ll talk about is they said we’re going to raise rates and we’re going to let off when we have to let off. They’re giving you all these signals to get bulled up.

TN: Yeah. I just want to make it clear because I think there’s a misconception out there about the VIX. I think a lot of people believe that the VIX reflects volatility in the market today. And that’s not at all it. I just want to make clear as we talk about it, that we’re looking at the options market over the next 30 days and how the Fed potentially is playing in that options market to make things look like a soft landing. Right?

AM: Yeah. They’ve erased trillions of dollars in the past OPEXes, and they’re just lining everybody up for another one. I mean, I think at one time it was 9 trillion. Another instance was 11 trillion. Just obliterated options.

TN: There’s a lot of opportunity in this. Right. I mean, if you see what’s coming, it can be really interesting.

AM: Well, this is a pattern thing. People do what they know. They’re creatures of habit. Fed is no different.

TN: That’s right. Very good. So on that note, Sam, you had an interesting newsletter out this week looking at kind of the recession. And one of the interesting charts which you have now is looking at durable goods, all durable goods and durable goods, excluding transportation.

Can you talk us through that a little bit and help us understand what that means for kind of the recession that we hear talked about so much over the past few weeks?

SR: Yeah, certainly. It’s pretty straightforward. Right. If you look at a combination of same-store sales across for retailers across all of them and not just a few big ones that made headlines, things were fine. Then you look at durable goods.

Durable goods skyrocketed coming out of COVID. And guess what? They’re continuing to make new COVID highs. Yeah. They just put it on a month-over-month basis. But it’s pretty aggressive to say that while they’re still growing and still ex-autos above anything that you can get back into the 80s. That’s a pretty big figure there.

It’s very hard to say, hey, we’re in the middle of or entering a recession when you have jobless claims sitting at 210, 215 thousand a week and you have durable goods sitting that high, the Red book same-store sales are in the low teens. That is an absolutely stunning figure for any time outside of call it COVID. Right. I mean, normally you’re very pleased with a 5% figure.

So it’s very difficult to get to the whole recession narrative unless you’re looking for something to really break here in a major way. We’ve already seen a housing break. I mean, we called that out a long time ago, but at the end of the day, if you don’t have people defaulting on their homes, which they’re not, and you don’t have a significant number of layoffs in the construction industry, which we haven’t seen, you can have a slowdown in home building and home builders and home buying and not really have it be systemically important to the US economy.

TN: Right. And we’ve had some layouts in Tech, which you talked about a couple of weeks ago, but a lot of those are bodies that people kind of panic bought. Right. They overbought headcount and now they’re shedding that headcount that they overbought.

I don’t know if that’s isolated to Tech or if that’s just happened across a service industry generally, but it seems like we’re starting to see a narrative that there’s a lot of layouts happening and a lot more coming. Do you see much of that, or are you seeing much of that outside of Tech?

SR: No, not really. It’s a San Francisco problem, not a San Diego problem. That’s the way I like to frame it is. Yeah. You overhired a lot of people in tech.

TN: And paid a huge amount of money for them.

SR: And paid a premium. And when you paid a premium and figured out that COVID wasn’t forever and the COVID demand wasn’t forever, if you want to realign your cost structure with your revenue outlook, you’ve got to take some head count down. But to be honest, you’re really not seeing it be something that’s systemic to say the entirety of the labor market by any stretch. West Texas isn’t laying people off on the oil drilling front. They still need.

TN: I’ve two friends who’ve just been hired to go out on rigs in the past two months. I mean, that is still building up.

SR: It’s still building up. And there’s nowhere near enough labor to do it. And you don’t have enough labor and leisure, right?

TN: Yeah.

SR: I really do think that we’re going to see the summer of vacations at any price. And if you look at leisure and hospitality, they are well understaffed. And that’s going to continue to be a problem. This is San Francisco problem, not a San Diego problem.

TN: Okay. So let me ask you guys, and I’ve been running through this, bouncing this off a couple of people over the past couple of weeks. But through the COVID period, banking analysts and investors have been pretty lenient on management teams. Hey, just make it through. Just keep running your business. Yes. We can tolerate a lot of kind of variability. They’re very forgiving on things.

Now that we’re normalizing, and I heard someone say this week something like only 7% of the workforce is actually working from home. I don’t know if that’s accurate or not, but I heard somebody say that maybe it was 17, but I think it was seven.

But now that we’re kind of normalizing, will those investors and analysts become tougher on companies on those management teams? Because it seems like they’ve been very loose, giving them huge birth to do whatever they want just to keep the business together over COVID? Are those expectations tightening down?

AM: I would have to say absolutely. I mean, in the past two years, you’re talking about just companies treading water, navigating the turbulent water of the market. Now you need actual leadership to figure out what’s going on with the supply chains, how to get workers working at a productive rate, getting supply and so on and so forth.

It’s crunch time now because although we can talk about a recession not happening, and I think that’s accurate. Look at the retail numbers that just keep coming out. We even said don’t short retail do that. The piper has got to be paid and management has to step up right now. 100%.

SR: Yeah. And step down. I think that’s a completely relevant one. And a lot of it is concentrated in VC.

TN: Right.

SR: A lot of it is things that you don’t get the AK on. These are private companies that raised at ridiculous multiples during COVID. Those are going to continue to see some downroads here.

TN: Right. But not just in private companies. Do you think that because of the change expectations post COVID, do you think we’ll see some management turnover in some large companies?

SR: Yeah. You’ve already seen Jack Dorsey out, right? You’ve seen that kind of called the Elon effect on that front? Yes. You’re going to see a lot of them.

In particular, I would say you’re probably going to see give it six to nine months when the body is washed up on shore from the downturn in DC, there’s going to be a lot of people that went over their toes there and they’re going to be axed.

AM: Yeah. Not just that, Sam. Not just that being pressured but also there’s going to be a lot of companies out there looking for merges and acquisitions that are going to force these.

TN: So if we don’t have a recession, we’ll still have a recalibration of, say, valuation expectations. Is that fair to say?

AM: I would say so. I mean, talking about recession, it’s a numbers thing. It’s a perception of what numbers is being displayed by the Fed and the Treasury. I mean, they can just fabricate those for however long they have to. So you won’t technically be in recession, but wage inflation, inflation is going out of control.

TN: You kind of rolled your eyes when I said that, but what were you thinking?

SR: I don’t know.

TN: That’s a good answer. What do you expect for next week? We’ve got four trading days next week. What’s going through your mind and what are you thinking about as you go into the holiday weekend?

AM: Bull bear line, 4250. I expect them to at least try to come close to that. But there’s going to be a lot of sellers out there trying to get whatever they can figuring out that OPEX and the Fed minutes are coming out next month with more rate hikes.

TN: Okay, 4250 on the S&P. Sam, what are you thinking?

SR: I’ll be watching the dollar really closely. If you continue to see a lot less pressure underneath the dollar here, oil is going to moon. So I’m watching oil very closely, mostly due to the dollar and some downward pressure on longer term rates. As we continue to see the narrative of the fed go fast then backtrack call it 1994 with 2001 characteristics.

TN: Interesting. It’ll be great to see. It’d be really interesting to see it, guys. Have a great holiday weekend. Thanks very much and have a great week ahead. Thank you.

AM: Thanks.

SR: Thank you, Tony.

Tags Bull, Christmas, covid, Crypto, Fed, Jack Dorsey, Nvidia, OpEX, San Diego, San Francisco, The Week Ahead, US, vc, VIX, week ahead

Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 16 May 2022

Post author By admin
Post date May 14, 2022

The number one issue for Americans is inflation. As long as this is a top consideration, the pressure will be on the Fed to bring it down. Sam has been pretty consistent with 3 x 50 rate hikes in May, June, and July. What changed in trading today? Is everyone still bearish? Samuel Rines explains.

Also, what’s next for crypto? Luna fell from $90 last Thursday to $0.00005952 on Friday. Their circulation went from 4 billion yesterday to 6.5 trillion today. Watching the crypto fallout is terrible – lots of people have lost lots of money in this supposedly immutable “currency”. Albert Marko explains what happens next.

Lastly, is China really falling apart? We’ve seen some unsettling posts over the past several weeks out of China. From lockdowns to port closures to gossip that Xi Jinping has been sidelined.

Key themes:

Is everyone a bear now?
What’s next for crypto?
Is China really falling apart?

This is the 18th 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 experts on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Sam: https://twitter.com/SamuelRines
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon

Listen to this episode on Spotify:

Transcript

TN: Hi and welcome to the Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash, and as usual, we have our team, Sam Rines and Albert Marko. Tracy, who’s not with us today.

Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to subscribe to our YouTube channel. It helps us a lot get visibility, and it really helps you get reminded when a new episode is out so you don’t miss anything.

Gosh. Big week for everyone. I wish I had fallen asleep a week ago and just woken up now after Friday’s trading. But it’s been a big week all around for everyone.

Guys, we really have a lot to talk about this week. We’re covering the markets. Is everyone a bear now? That’s one of our big topics that we’ll have Sam lean on. Next is what’s next for crypto? A lot of action on crypto, a lot of scary things happening with crypto and then some news out of China or speculation out of China. We’re asking, is China falling apart?

So Sam, let’s start with you first. I guess one of the most relevant items I’ve seen circulating and it was in your newsletter today is the top issues for Americans on the screen right now.

It’s clearly inflation. As long as that’s a top consideration. The pressure on the Fed to bring inflation down is huge. So you’ve been pretty consistent with three times 50 basis point hikes for May, June and July. What’s really changed in trading today? And is everyone still bearish?

SR: Yeah. I mean, everyone still seems to kind of be floating a little bearish, but I kind of like to go back to the number one concern is inflation. We shot ourselves in the foot and then the second one is getting shot in the head, right. It’s violent crime and crime. You add those two together and it’s even larger portion of inflation. So it’s safety and food. Right.

People like to eat and they want to be able to eat and they want to feel safe. I think it’s that simple. Those should be the top two concerns in this type of environment when you have the data pointing towards continuing higher inflation numbers and continuing crime.

On the is everyone a bear front? I think it’s a little complicated, right.

Because if you look at the flows into and out of indices and into and out of fixed income, and when you look at the flows, it’s easy to kind of say everyone’s a bear. Right. Pouring money into Treasuries, taking money out of indices. But at the same time, underneath the surface, you really want to be careful on what you’re a bear on and what you’re not.

There’s a lot of things that can still make money in this environment, oil, food, etc. can still make money. And there’s a lot of things that are probably still going to get torched. Anything that’s a little high beta is probably not the place you want to be for the whole time. Tradable but unlikely to be a long-term type trade.

TN: Like, I noticed some of the techs coming back today, and that’s great. And I hope people don’t lose more there. But is that something that you would consider kind of be careful if you’re going back in type of trade?

SR: Some of it. Not all of it. There’s a lot of tech that actually looks fairly attractive here, whether it’s from a valuation perspective or whether it’s from a very long term perspective.

A lot of stuff re-rated, re-rated fast, and it looks attractive. And there’s a lot of stuff that looks like it’s probably going bankrupt. Right. I wouldn’t be trying to bottom tick Carvana.

AM: Actually to expand on that, Sam, about who’s a bear and bears or Bulls or whatnot. I kind of think that we have to separate the higher great institutions versus the retail dip buyers that are just looking for that get rich, quick return. Many of the institutions, the ones I’ve talked to, are absolutely still bearish. They don’t see real value in this economy until the market until 3700.

Coincidentally, one of the hedge fund guys told me at 3500, you have an actual financial crisis in the United States just because everything’s leveraged up. So I don’t think that the Fed was even going to want to afford or going down past the 38, 3700, in my opinion.

SR: In 100% of that, Albert. Right. You have to separate those two teams of people. Right. The dip buyers are going to try every single time to get rich quick. Real long term allocators are going to take their time here. They’re not going to rush and, those are very large positions they have to take. And they don’t get to move in and call it for two or three weeks. They have to move in for very long periods of time.

So it’s Albert’s point. I don’t think that should be underrated, period.

AM: You can just look at the valuations of some of these companies that are still out in the stratosphere, like one of the ones I’ve recommended, Mosaic, Tight and Tire. They’re just ten fold of what they were in 2020. How do you buy these things? You can’t buy these things.

TN: Right. We’ve seen a lot of chatter about margin calls over the past week and a half. Obviously, that’s been scary for the first wave of kind of people going in. But when that second wave hits, when does that start to hit that second wave? Once we go 3800 or lower? So is that when things get really scary?

AM: Actually, I think part of the margin calls happened this week, today, actually Friday. I think a lot of guys had a liquidate positions and cover shorts and whatnot. And we got a little bit of a squeeze of a rally. I didn’t really feel like a Fed was pumping just thought like people short covers and people trying to get stuff off the board.

TN: Right.

SR: 100%. That’s where I think. I don’t think you want to be in front of a wave of liquidation for let’s call it sun and Ark, right? You do not want to be in front of either one of those two right now, period.

TN: Yeah, it was nice to have a Green Day, but it didn’t necessarily feel like a strong Green Day.

Okay, guys, let’s move on to crypto. Albert, I think you’re the man here. You’ve talked about crypto for a long time. It’s bad. This week is bad. And we’ve got a chart for Luna.

Luna fell from $90 last Thursday to 5, 10 thousand of a cent today, I think. Their circulation went from 4 billion yesterday to 6.5 trillion today. So it doesn’t sound very immutable to me. So the watching crypto fallout, it’s been pretty terrible. Lots of people have lost lots of money and people are questioning and cynical about words like immutable now.

This is something that I think experienced people have expected. But what happens next? Do we have a clearing out of some of these currencies? Do people just hold at 5, 10 thousand of a cents? Do we see some of these actually become currencies or is it all just going to get regulated and kind of thrown out the window?

AM: Well, are they going to be currencies? No, they’ll never be currencies. The dollar is going to be the currency of the world status for trade for the remainder of our lifetimes, whoever is alive today. That’s just the basic fundamental fact that you have to come to grips with.

This is like part one of the closing call for cryptos in my opinion. They got a good dose of the reality that when things need to get liquidated, you’re not liquidating residential towers in Miami on your portfolio. You’re liquidating some Ponzi scheme cryptos that are in your pocket that your clients really made you get into to begin with.

From the retail side, as much as I want to gloat, because I’ve been saying that this was going to happen for years, it’s really not that funny because you had guys out there pushing these crypto things and saying the dollar is dying, gold is dying, digital future, blah, blah, blah. Look at this chart, look at that chart. But the reality is there are nothing but pump and dump schemes. And people lost a lot of money.

I had a friend that goes to school, his daughter goes to school with my daughter. And he told me months ago I put everything to Litecoin for the College fund. I tried to reason with this guy.

TN: Please don’t do that.

AM: Yeah, well, community college for that kid.

TN: Albert, they’re following the lead of some, analysts are credible. They have a credible history and they’ve really started pushing this stuff. Now they’ve dialed it back. But some people who had previously been credible analysts were pushing this stuff.

AM: They’re liars. They’re all liars.

SR: Had been.

AM: They’re trying to get services sold and people to watch their YouTube channels and get subscriptions up. So of course you’re going to go and sit there and try to pump crypto to the retail crowd because they don’t know any better, right?

SR: And anyone who looked if you really dug into the Luna situation, you could understand very quickly how that could unwind in a way that was dramatic. This wasn’t even constructed as well as a pre 2008 money market fund. At least you knew what the money market fund held behind it and how it was going to actually return money to you.

With Tether, it’s supposed to be a crypto ish money market fund. We still don’t know what that actually holds. The whole thing to me is regrettable to Albert’s point, right. The two of us kind of got picked on when we giggled off paying for oil in crypto earlier this year. But the two of us have been kind of like, “no, not so much.” So while it’s tempting to kind of have that little bit of a cocky grin.

It’s a really sad situation and there’s a lot of money that got shredded very quickly there.

TN: Very quickly in less than a week. It’s insane how much money. If anybody who follows me on Twitter knows that I invest in some Doge last year, stuck with it for a few months, got out I did it because it was a joke of a coin. Everyone knew it was a joke of a coin. I wanted to be on part of the joke, and I made some money at it. And that’s it, right? That’s it. You can’t necessarily think of this stuff as a serious investment because it’s so highly unregulated and people engage in this pump and dump stuff.

AM: Yeah. We can have a conversation on this for hours. This is actually at the heart of the problem of the US economy at the moment. All these gig employee, all these gig employees service industry and jobs and whatnot, they left work got into crypto. Got stimulus checks, sat at home, kept getting unemployment, not going to work, and now we’re stuck with the labor shortage in reality. I don’t care what the Fed says and what Yellen says about the market. The labor market is good. The labor market is absolute trash right now. We have no workers anywhere right now. And because. Yeah, this is part of it.

TN: So that’s a good question. With crypto, kind of at least temporarily, maybe permanently dying, does that help the employment picture? Does that help people come back to market even a little bit?

AM: People had tens of thousands of dollars in a Coinbase account that are now $500. They’re going to have to go back to their jobs. And that’s just the reality of it. If you want me to go even a step further, this is probably the intent of the Fed and the treasury is to start eliminating this excess money, forcing people back to work.

SR: Yeah. Oh, 100%. In one of my notes this week that Tony, I think you saw, I sent out the video from SNL of Jimmy Carter saying, hey, get 8% of your money out of your account and light on fire. Guess what? The Fed just did that for millennials.

TN: Yeah.

SR: It’s that simple. The Fed just lit at least 8% of millennial money on fire, generally. Right. And it’s unlikely to come back that quickly. And I think if it wasn’t a direct policy, it was a side effect that the Fed sitting there going, oh, well, that works.

AM: I guarantee I talk to a lot of people. It was a direct policy. I don’t care. I’ll throw the Fed under the bus. They deserve to be thrown under the bus anyways.

TN: Well, yeah, it is where it is. And I would assume more regulations coming at some point because people will scream, especially with Coinbase.

I think it’s Coinbase or one of the exchanges saying that they’re going to undo a lot of the trades over the last two or three days.

AM: Okay.

TN: There are no regulations at all.

SR: Just call them the LME.

TN: Yeah, exactly. So crypto is the LME now, and it’s insane. So a lot of consumer protections are going to be talked about. A lot of regulations going to come in. I think that party is pretty much over.

AM: Yeah. Once the regulations started coming in from Congress and different governments in the world, they’re going to see how false their idea of decentralization really was.

TN: Yeah. Okay, guys, let’s move on to China. We’ve seen a lot over the past few weeks and really gossipy stuff about China. But today I saw a note from Mike Green on Twitter, which is on screen talking about Xi Jinping and Li Kaqiang, and Xi basically being sidelined on May 4.

I also saw another tweet yesterday, a guy going through Shanghai during the lockdown. If you haven’t seen it, the first of the thread is on the screen now. Check it out. It’s really interesting.

China is empty and it’s really sad.

So we’ve seen these really unsettling posts over the past several weeks out of China, from lockdowns to port closures to gossiping Xi as sidelined. So to you guys, what does that all mean? Is it something you’re taking seriously? Do you think it’s something that will have immediate effects? What does that look like to you?

AM: China. China is a big quagmire in itself. It’s such a large country. You’re going to have all sorts of rumors of Xi being sidelined and unrest in different cities like Shanghai and whatnot. But the Chinese are pretty pragmatic. They know that things are not going really well. So they’re going to have to lift off they’re going to have to lift off some of these just draconian policies with locking down people because it’s going to really hurt their economy. And part of it’s probably because they’re fighting inflation, too. They’re trying to cut down demand until supplies catch up. I mean, they got problems over there with inflationary issues.

TN: Also with the deval, with the port closures, with a lot of other stuff that’s happening there, their economy is already host. Right. They’re definitely not hitting 5.5, which is their target this year. And I think they’ll be lucky to have a zero growth year.

But I think Albert, on the political side, a lot of this kind of theater that we’re seeing play out on Weibo and Twitter and other things. Do you think this is plausible?

AM: Of course it’s plausible. I mean, you have the vultures circuit around Xi right now. They want him out. You have one elite group keeping him in power. But most likely have three or four other elite groups within the CCP that want him out. There’s no question about that. He can’t even go out in public.

TN: That’s an important thing that many people don’t think about is there are parties within the party. The CCP is not a unified party. There are factions within the party. Many Westerners don’t understand that. There are definitely factions within the party, and they’ll stab each other in the back in a second.

AM: There’s factions everywhere you go. People try to, China as a one rule or one party, one system, but even the United States, you have the Tea Party, the Freedom Caucus, the Progressive, so on and so forth. I mean, it’s all fragmented no matter what you do.

TN: Yeah, Sam. So China is second largest economy, ports closed, people in their houses, all of that stuff. So how long can they do this before it affects everybody or has it already started doing?

SR: Oh, it’s already affecting everything. The supply chains are already completely ruined because of it. There’s no question about that. I think the real question is what happens when they reopen, right?

We’ve got oil sitting at $109 and half a China is shut down. That is something that doesn’t, I mean, it’s kind of scary, right? You have a bunch of people that aren’t using as much as they should be right now. You begin to spin that back up. That could be a really interesting scenario overall. I don’t know.

AM: You know, Sam, that actually loops back to what you were talking about the Fed trying to fight inflation. No matter what policy they come up with, there’s still supply chain shortages and labor and everything that no matter what they do, they can’t fix.

SR: Their host. It’s an amazing world where you have half the Chinese, let’s just click through. Half the Chinese economy is shut down. You have the US dollar sitting at 105, 106 somewhere in there, and you have oil sitting at 110. Anybody who’s saying oil prices look a little toppy here might want to look at what happens when the dollar falls and China’s going.

AM: That’s what we’re going to have inflation in the five to 7% range for the next 18 months. I can’t say lower than that.

TN: 18 months, you say?

AM: 18 months. How are they going to get it lowered? China opens and then what? You know what I mean? And then you still have shortages everywhere. I mean, go to some of the stores. They have baby formula shortages.

On any given day, you have small materials you need from the home short. Everywhere. That’s going to create artificial inflation. On top of that, you have wage inflation. How do you get that down?

SR: The only way you get it down is having less employees. Look at Silicon Valley. Silicon Valley has started laying people off, and that’s not getting enough. It’s more than just Carvana.

AM: And then that’s the thing. Later in this year, Democrats and Joe Biden can have a real big problem unemployment numbers, starting to creep up. They can’t hide that forever with the BLS manipulation.

SR: Look at the household number. The household number is already not looking great. And that’s the one that they choose not to hide for a reason. Yeah, sure, the establishment is up, but you look at that household number and it’s printing negative already, guys.

TN: Yeah. One more thing I want to cover is this has to do with China shut down and it has to do with the possibility of political instability in China. So there are two separate issues. The newsletter today talked about reshoring.

So these things seem to provide more instability and a lack of reliability of Chinese sourcing. So what are you seeing to support the reshoring argument?

SR: Oh, lots of things. I mean, you have Hyundai. That’s likely to announce a pretty big factory next week in Georgia. You have everyone from Micron to a bunch of other call it higher tech firms beginning to announce that they’re moving back here. They’re building here and they’re going to manufacture here or they’re going to manufacture in Mexico. One of the other.

If you want to have China like characteristics without supply chain issues, you go to Mexico and that re regionalization trend. That’s the theme of mine. Is beginning to pick up steam and it’s going to pick up much more steam, in my opinion.

North America is going to be basically, in my opinion is going back to being the world’s, not manufacturing hub, but the world’s high end manufacturing hub. If you want something that it’ll be like big Germany.

AM: Yeah, I mean that’s just the most logical thing to do is to start putting your supply chains closer to your luxury consumers and you have to do that. But I’ve been high on the Canadian economy and the North American economy.

I think Europe absolutely they’re in deep trouble at the moment. So is Asia. But Europe especially.

TN: On the reshoring note, guys, if Germany can’t get power, will we start to see some German manufacturing firms potentially moving to the US?

SR: You already make AMGs here. Mercedez Ben’s AMGs.

TN: Yeah.

SR: They’re made in Alabama. But they’re made in Alabama.

AM: Yes. But Tony to your question, actually, I do have a colleague that works for Austrian driven outfit and they have been buying factories in the United States specifically for this reason. It’s the only place that people are going to be buying things or has money at the moment. Their entire export industry in China is dead and they’ve sat there and been lackadaisical and never sat there and tried to put their networks back into Africa where the real emerging market should be focused on Africa. It’s going to be bigger than Asia anyway.

SR: Let’s also be honest, they just got done pulling out of Africa in some ways. A couple of decades ago. They missed that boat.

TN: They did. And so did the Americans. So. Hey guys, thank you very much. Really appreciate this. If you’re watching please like and subscribe have a great weekend and have a great week ahead. Thank you.

AM: Thanks, Tony.

SR: Thanks, Tony.

Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 11 Apr 2022

Post author By admin
Post date April 10, 2022

As a start, we looked at the Friday’s trading session and what it means. Is this a bullish market?

We’ve made a few recommendations over the past couple of months. We hope you’ve been paying attention specially on $IPI (Intrepit Potash) and $NTR (Nutrien).

We’ve talked about the tumbling lumber markets in recent weeks. What are Sam and Albert’s current thinking on lumber as we’re looking at $LB lumber futures. Sam talked about housing last month. We looked at $XHB, the home builders ETF. How about the rates and housing? We’ve seen that homebuilders are getting hit with expected rate rises. What is the impact of this on the mortgage market, housing inventory, etc?

Shanghai has been closed for a few weeks now and the largest port in the world won’t open for about another week. How can the second largest economy continue to close when the West has already accepted Covid as endemic? How can manufacturers rely on China as a manufacturing center if they’re unreliable?

For the week ahead, we talked about the earnings season, their portfolios, and Albert talked about Chinese equities for months, etc. Is now the time to look at KWEB, which he discussed for some time?

We’ve got CPI out on Tuesday and is expected at around 7.9% and Retail sales on Friday, which is expected at around 0.3%. Inflation seems unstoppable and consumers seem to be getting tired of spending. Sam explains on this.

Key themes from last week

Friday trading session
Don’t say we didn’t warn you
Rates and housing (Tuna & Caviar)
China’s shutdown

Key themes for the Week Ahead

Earnings season expectations
Near-term equity portfolios
CPI (Tuesday), expected 7.9%

This is the 14th episode of The Week Ahead in collaboration of Complete Intelligence with Intelligence Quarterly, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead experts on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd
Sam: https://twitter.com/SamuelRines
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon

Listen to the podcast on Spotify:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4uQUT91ocSlxs0sdNR7Vt6?si=3ba0d0bb07724b9f

Transcript

TN: Hi, guys, and welcome to The Week Ahead. My name is Tony Nash. I’ve got Albert Marco and Sam Rines with us. Tracy is not able to join us today. Before we get started, if you don’t mind, could you please like and subscribe. That would help us out. And we’ll let you know every time a new episode is up and running.

This past week we saw a lot, but I think the most interesting thing or one of the most recent interesting things is Friday’s trading. We’re going to start talking about the market action on Friday, and then we’re going to get into a couple of things that we told you about trades that if you were paying attention, you would have seen. We’re actually going to go into rates and housing, and Sam’s going to talk a little bit about tuna and Caviar, that discussion from the Fed speech earlier this week. And then we’re going to talk about China’s shutdown, which seems to be getting worse by the hour. So first let’s get into the Friday trading session, guys. What are some of the things you saw on Friday?

AM: Well, from my perspective, the market is acting like crypto. I mean, we’re seeing interday moves on some of these equities, like 5% up and down. It’s a little bit silly. And you wonder if it’s like light volume, if it’s market manipulation by the Fed. It’s just uncanny. I’ve never seen anything like this before. And obviously the market is weak and we’ve talked about black clouds coming over the market and what’s going on. But I don’t see anything any catalyst that would say that this is the bullish market at all. So we’re waiting for multiple numbers of CPI, retail and whatnot. But for me, it’s just like everybody is on pause waiting to see which way this market goes before they take action.

TN: So a couple of weeks ago, we saw a lot of money move into equities. Right? So that money moved in. It’s just parking and waiting. Is that what’s happening?

AM: Yeah, I assume so. The Fed, as it just ups the rates, forces more money to move into the US market, which is actually a brilliant move. You know, this is what we’re seeing. A lot of money here, not knowing what to do at the moment.

SR: To Albert’s point, there’s a lot of money that’s moved in here, but it’s moved into some pretty passive areas that it’s just not moving much in terms of the overall market. You look at fixed income, right? Lots of money moving in there, short into the curb, et cetera, et cetera. I think that’s some of the more interesting stuff as well. But there’s also this weird thing going on where equal weight is outperforming the market cap weight. And has been for some time now, particularly over the last week. If you look yesterday, S&P closed in the red, but if you were equal weighted, close green and it closed green on a non trivial basis, and it was 35 basis points, something like that.

That deviation between market that was led by predominantly tech and only tech, to a market that’s led by other sectors in general is something I think under the surface that paying attention to it can be something that at least can make some money in the near term.

TN: Including Crypto Walmart, which we’ve seen over the past week as well. So we’ll talk about retail later in the show.

Okay. So we had as a group talked about some calls over the past couple of months. Some of those were calls earlier, but let’s get into those just to walk through. Albert, you and Tracy had talked about Intrepid Potash. She talked about Nutrien. We’ve got those on the screen right now. Can you walk us through those and kind of what you’re thinking was on those and what’s happened? What do you expect for those to happen in the near term?

AM: Well, speaking about IPI, Intrepit. It’s like a leveraged ETF in the fertilizer market. That thing swings 5-10, 11% in a week, no problem. That call was basically on the premise that the Ukraine war is going to go on. Russia is cutting off the fertilizer supply. Belarus has a big fertilizer supply. OCP in Morocco has shifted from actual fertilizers to more like phosphate batteries for EVs.

So it only made sense that besides Mosaic, which is the 800 pound gorilla, IPI and Nutrien were just the logical choices for investments.

TN: And is there room to run on fertilizers like there was a target put on Nutrient by one of the banks of like 126 or something? Do you think we could keep running on those trades?

AM: We can, right? Certainly we can. It just really depends on what goes on with the Russians and whatnot. My only risk for running too far is that the Dixie could go to 105, 110 and then we have significant problems across the market, not just fertilizer prices.

TN: Okay. So even if dollar does go to 110, we’re planting now in the US, right. And now and for the next couple of months. And the fertilizer demand is right now and it has been for the past couple of months. But it’s especially right now, is all of that, say planting demand, is that all priced in already, or do you feel like some of that is to come?

AM: I think it’s pretty much priced in. And let’s just be careful because some of the farms that are planting crops are using nitrogen and also fertilizer derived from nat gas. So it really depends on which way the farming community wants to go, what they see the most profitable crops.

TN: Okay, great. That’s good to know. We also talked about lumber, as I remember a conversation probably three or four weeks ago where I think, Sam, you brought up lumber and how lumber was coming off. Can you walk us through that trade, as we have it on the screen?

SR: Yeah, sure. I mean, it’s a Fed trade, right. It’s a Fed tightening quickly, mortgage rates going up and housing demand coming down. The idea that a Fed going this quickly and having the market priced in, there’s a difference. Right. The Fed has only moved 25 basis points.

TN: Right.

SR: The market has done the rest of the tightening for it across the curve. It’s been pretty spectacular. Housing, housing related stocks, those in general, are going to be the first thing that the Fed affects and they’re going to be the first thing that the Fed affects on the margin very quickly. And you’ve seen mortgage rates go to five plus percent.

TN: Sure. Before we get on to housing, I just have a couple of questions about lumber and other commodities. So the downside we’ve seen come in lumber over the past week or so. Do we expect that to come to other commodities as well? I mean, things like weed and corn, there’s still pressure upward pressure on those. But do we expect other commodities to react the way lumber has?

SR: Oh, no, I would not expect the foodstuffs to react in anywhere near the same manner as lumber. Right. Lumber is a fairly… Lumber, you cut it up, you put it in inventory, you sell it, and then you use it for something.

TN: Right.

SR: It doesn’t last forever in good condition either.

TN: Great. Okay, good. Thank you. Now moving on to home builders, which is where you are going. You also talked about XHB, I think two or three weeks ago, and we’re flashing some warning signs about that. We’ve seen obviously rates rise. I was speaking to a mortgage broker earlier this week. He’s doing mortgage at almost 6% right now and expects them to go up kind of close to 8%.

We’re starting to see the resurgence of ARMs. People are already getting back into adjustable rate mortgages because 5.99% is high. Just as a bit of background, less than 10% of US mortgages over the past few years have been adjustable rates. So can you talk us through XHB? And maybe you had mentioned earlier kind of Home Depot and some of the other home makers. Can you talk us through what kind of… Home Depot was a leading indicator on that? Is that fair to say?

SR: It’s fair to say Home Depot and Lowe’s this kind of ties into the lumber conversation. Home Depot and Lowe’s were two of the best at ordering and trying to actually keep inventory on the shelves, even when during the first tremendous spike in lumber. Right. So they kept a lot of lumber on the shelves. They currently have a lot of lumber inventory on the shelves. And it’s part of the reason that you’re seeing what could be described as almost an over inventory of lumber, not just at those two entities, but across the board, because everybody had to buy lumber in order to keep it in stock.

So, yeah, Home Depot and Lowe’s are the tip of the spear in terms of both home building and in terms of home remodeling. Those are both fairly significant drivers of the business there. There’s a little bit of weekend contractor type deals, but very little.

So overall, I would say they are a leading indicator and they have not been acting very well. But when you have mortgage rates to your point at 6%, that creates a problem for the marginal buyer. It’s not a problem for somebody who owns a home. Right. You have your mortgage rate locked in, et cetera, et cetera. It’s not going to destroy you. It might set off being able to put a new deck and redo a pool or something like that. But it’s not going to hurt you in any meaningful way.

TN: Right.

SR: It does hurt the marginal buyer. It hurts the first time buyer, et cetera. So you begin to have slower turns in housing and you begin to have problems with where does that incremental inventory of homes go? And that’s the real problem with higher invetories.

TN: Right. Before we move on to officially talking about rates and housing, I’ll share a story about a friend who is building a house and their lumber broker who should be able to get the best pricing actually has worse pricing right now than Home Depot. Okay. So they can actually go to Home Depot and get better pricing than their lumber broker. And that’s how messed up the lumber market is right now. They’re arbitraging their lumber broker versus retail any given week in their bulk buying to make sure that they can get their house built. So that market both on the lumber side and on the housing side is just a mess.

So let’s officially go to housing and rates. We’ve done a lot of the discussion, but there was a CNBC story about rising mortgage rates are causing more home sellers to lower their asking prices.

And Sam, you talked about that marginal buyer, which is great, and that new buyer. When I talk to people who are doing mortgages, they tell me that even with the rate rises we’ve seen over the past couple of weeks, there is still not a lot of inventory on the market. That’s a big issue. And they’re not seeing a fall in demand for new houses. So is this kind of a last minute rush for people to get a house before rates rise even more? Is that plausible?

SR: There’s some plausibility to that. Yeah, 100%. The other thing is that we’re in Texas. Right. The demand for housing in Texas, the demand for housing in Florida does not tend to be, I would say, as tied to mortgage rates as everywhere else. The rest of the country is much more sensitive to what’s going on. Texas and Florida and a couple of other spots simply have too much inbound demand from higher priced areas. So California, New York, et cetera. There’s still an arbitrage when you sell a place in California or sell a place in New York and move to Texas, Florida, some of the Sunbelt States.

So it’s tough to take Texas as an example, particularly Houston. We’re actually the fourth largest city in the country, and yet we do not get counted in the S&P Schiller because of how different the housing market is here. Dallas gets kind of for whatever reason, but Houston does not.

TN: We’re not jealous at all about that.

SR: No, we’re not.

AM: Go ahead, Sam. Sorry.

SR: But just to wrap that up, I do think that there’s a nuance to Florida and Texas that should almost be ignored. When I look at the data, I’ll be taking out the Southeast region just because it’s one of those that is a little special at the moment.

AM: Yeah, that’s a key point that I always made is like, because of the migration patterns in blue to red States, things are just really wacky. Florida and Texas, Arizona will be red hot. Meanwhile, Seattle, Chicago, parts of New York are just dead spots at the moment. So until that all gets weeded out, people stop moving. Then we’ll actually see the housing market starting to cool off.

TN: Right? Yeah. I was just up in Dallas yesterday, and things are just as hot up there. And the immigration from the coast to Dallas, especially around financial services and tech, it’s just mind blowing. It is not stopping. It has been going on for probably five years, and it’s just not stopping. Those counties just north of Dallas are exploding and they continue to explode.

Okay, so our next topic is China and China’s slowdown. Shanghai has been closed for a couple of weeks with kind of a renewed round of Covid. And obviously the largest Port in the world, which is in Shanghai, is closed. And that kind of exacerbates our supply chain issues, especially around manufactured goods that we’ve been seeing globally. We’ve seen overnight that. Well, not just overnight, but over the last, say, five days. Food has become really scarce in Shanghai. We’ve seen people on social media talking about how it’s difficult to get food. We’ve started to see little mini protests around Shanghai, around food. And things are seem to be becoming pretty dire.

Overnight, we saw that parts of Guangzhou that the government is considering closing, parts of Guangzhou, which Guangzhou is the world’s second largest port. So the two largest ports in the world, there is a potential that those are closed. There is also gossip about parts of Beijing being closed as well. So I’m curious, what do you guys think about that? I can talk about China for days, but I’m curious, kind of, what alarm bells does that raise for you? Not just for China, but globally.

AM: Well, Tony, you recall, you Balding, and I discussing China’s attempt to attack Taiwan and what had happened. And I had pointed out that closing those ports would cause food insecurity and here we are. Although it’s not a Taiwan invasion, it’s a zero Covid policy that shut down the ports and now we have food stress in China causing all sorts of problems.

Most China observers, especially yourself, know that Shanghai has always been the epicenter of uprising for the CCP. It’s a problem for them. They’ve always tried to wash it. Maybe that’s why they’ve come down hard on Zero Covid Policy. That’s something that I’d have to ask you. But from there, this was very predictable. I mean, you shut down ports, China has a food security problem.

TN: On a good day, China has a food security problem. It is an issue that the Chinese authorities worry about day in, day out, not just when there’s a pandemic. Okay. So one of the things that I was talking to some people about yesterday is why is China closing down? Why are they closing down these big cities? There’s a lot of gossip. You can find a lot of theories around social media saying there’s some sinister plan, honestly and for people that don’t know. I’ve done work with Chinese officials over years. And the economic planners I was seconded to economic planner for almost two years. I believe that they’re closing because they’re worried about how the China virus looks, meaning they don’t want Covid to be seen as the China virus. And they worry about the world’s perception if there’s another outbreak that comes from China.

And so I think the leadership believes that they have to be seen to be disproportionately countering COVID so that there isn’t more wording and dialogue about the kind of, “China virus.” And so, again, I don’t think there’s something sinister going on. There’s a lot of gossip about China intentionally trying to stop supply chains to bring the west to its knees and all the stuff. I don’t believe that at all. I think it’s real sensitivity to how they look globally.

Of course, there’s the public health issues domestically. That goes without saying. But I think a big part of it is how do they look globally.

AM: Yeah, but doesn’t shutting down these ports is going to cause even a bigger spike in inflation within China and actually globally?

TN: Oh, absolutely. This is the one thing that I think they didn’t plan on is they’re about to embark on a whole lot of fiscal, a whole lot of monetary stimulants because they have major government meetings in November of this year. So they absolutely cannot go into recession.

But here’s what I have been thinking about. Okay. We’re looking at a Russia-Ukraine war that could potentially bring down Russia and destabilize Russia domestically. We’re now over the past couple of weeks, looking at a China that is starting to self destruct domestically. And I don’t know of anybody who had the domestic issues of both China and Russia as systemic risks in 2022. These things are just coming out of nowhere. And those two risks can be destabilizing for the whole world. And I’ve said for some time, Western governments have to sit the Chinese leadership down and say, look, you guys are systemically important globally. You need to get your act together around COVID, and you have to normalize your economy because it’s hurting everybody.

AM: Great points. Now, going back to Guangdong, there are some really elite families in China out of that area, really wealthy ones, that actually basically gives Xi the support he needs in the CCP. If he loses those families, there’s real trouble for Xi going forward.

TN: I think there’s trouble for him anyway. I think he is not a one man show. Contrary to the popular Western opinion, Xi Jinping is not a one man show. He is not a single Emperor, kind of claiming things from on high. There is a group of people who run China. It’s just too big for a single individual to run.

So I think Xi has been, I wouldn’t necessarily say on thin ice, but I think things have been risky for him for some time. And as you say, it’s pretty delicate for him right now. And if he doesn’t handle this deftly, I think, again, there could be some real destabilizing factors in China. So this is something again, they didn’t plan for. They were talking about major infrastructure stimulus. They were talking about monetary stimulus, getting ready for this big party in November to nominate Xi for more power and all this other stuff. But it’s possible that these events could really hurt him and really hurt his relationships, meaning the key people around him and then the other factions.

Because as much as people say that China is a one party state, sure, it’s a one party state. But there are factions within that one party. And it should be alarming for China and destabilizing China should be alarming for other people around the world.

AM: Yeah. Same thing as Putin. Like their factions behind them that keep them in power. Same thing as Xi. Most autocratic rulers have a circle of trust behind them that keep them in there. If Xi falls and China starts to, I don’t want to say crumble, but at least wobble, if we think we have serious supply chain issues now, wait till that happens.

TN: Oh, yeah. So Russia is important on energy and a couple of other things, but it’s not globally systemically important on a lot. Okay. I would say maybe it’s regionally important, especially to Europe, but China is globally important. And if they can’t figure this out, it will destabilize everybody.

And so I think Western governments need to not lecture to China, but they need to go forward with real concern about China. How can we help you guys out? Right? How can we help you out? Can we get you vaccine? Can we get you support? Is there anything logistically we can do? That is a way that Western governments can come to the legitimate aid of China. They’ll act like they have it all together, but they don’t. It’s obvious. We see it every day on social media. They don’t.

So Western governments really need to offer genuine aid to China in terms of intelligence, in terms of vaccines, in terms of capabilities, and so on and so forth.

Good. Anything else on that?

AM: No, we covered that.

TN: Okay. Looking at the week ahead. Guys, we’ve got earnings season coming up. Can you talk us through your expectations for earnings season?

SR: Sure. I’ll jump in here quickly. I think there’s a few things to watch. One, the consumer sentiment has been dismal. Right. For the last six months. It’s falling off a cliff. Where the US University of Michigan survey, well below where it was at peak of Covid. But we haven’t necessarily seen retail sales. We haven’t seen corporate earnings and corporate announcements follow that sentiment lower whatsoever.

For anybody paying attention this past week, you had Costco with absolute blow out numbers in terms of its same store sales. Take out gasoline, take out anything, and you still have 7% foot traffic. That was stunning. And that’s not a cheap place to shop.

TN: Right.

SR: So that’s indicative of the higher end consumer that’s still holding in there, at least fairly well through March. That’s pretty important. So then there was Carnival with its best week ever in terms of bookings. Those two things are pretty important when it comes to what is the consumer actually doing versus what is the consumer actually saying, which I think is very interesting.

This week we’ll have Delta Airlines. It’ll be interesting to kind of listen to them and see what their bookings have looked like, see what their outlook is for the summer. And then I’ll be paying really close attention to the consumer side of the earnings reports, not necessarily as much the banks. I don’t really care what Jamie Dimon has to say about Fed policy, but I will say…

TN: I think she do.

SR: Nobody does. But I’ll say the quiet thing out loud. But I will be paying very close attention to what the earnings reports are saying about the consumer, because the consumer drives not just the US economy, but the global economy generally, both on the goods side, services side and really trying to parse through what’s happening, not what the US consumer keeps telling us is happening.

TN: Go ahead.

AM: Sam, really quick. How much of these earnings because I’m a little bit suspicious of how much is it inflationary, prices of everything are higher and remnants of stimulus PvP, whatever the people have been getting for the past year. How much is that calculated?

SR: Yes, which is one of the reasons why it’s a great point, one of the reasons why I pointed out Costco. Costco much less on the stimulus side, much less on the saving side, much more on the high-end kind of consistent consumer. And with foot traffic up 7%, inflation was I think it was about 8%, give or take. So they’re passing on the inflation and they’re still getting the foot traffic. So I think that’s an important one.

On the CCL side, it was after the bookings were after the significant stimulus had already run out or run off. You just weren’t getting checks. I think that was also an indication that maybe there’s a shift from the goods to the services side. The one thing that was somewhat disconcerting, if you’re paying attention to the higher end consumer, was Restoration Hardware. They ran down their book to about 200 million in backlog and don’t really appear to be bullish about this year. They guided well below what some were expecting. I think we’re going to hear a lot more about that, partially because they just can’t get enough inventory in time and they’re kind of in trouble on that front.

AM: Yeah.

SR: To your point, it’s a lot of inflation, but some of these guys are seeing some pretty good traffic, too.

AM: Yeah, actually, funny, you mentioned Restoration Hardware because that was one of the things I was looking at specifically for the housing market, like who’s buying a $30,000 at the moment right now. You know what I mean? It’s just silly.

TN: Yeah, that is silly. Okay, great. Thanks for that. And I’m interested to see how the earnings from Q1 also translate to Q2. I’m expecting a real turn in Q2, and I’m wondering how much that is on investors minds as they look at Q1 earnings.

Albert, as we move into the next point around kind of short term or near term equity portfolios. You’ve talked about KWEB for some time, and I’d like you to, if you don’t mind talking about KWEB a little bit, but also if you and Sam can help us understand what is your thinking right now on your term portfolio.

AM: I mean, KWEB is one of my favorite little stocks because it’s a China technology index and it’s been beaten down to a pulp by the Fed. They have absolutely annihilated not just China, but pretty much all foreign equities. And from my perspective, you’re looking at China stimulating in the fall of the shore of Xi. So it’s like it’s a no brainer to me. I think KWEB at 28 is a fantastic deal. Start piling into that.

One of my other ones I was looking at was FXI, which is basically all the China’s big wig companies. So that’s another one I was looking at right now. In terms of the US equities and portfolios, I mean, we’re so overvalued right now. Where do you put your money into? One of my favorite stocks was TWY a tightened tire. It makes 85% of the world’s agriculture tires. Right. I mean, this thing ran up from $1.45 to $14 at the moment. You know what I mean?

How do you put more money into equities at this stage without some sort of correction or something happening with the Fed to show us which way they’re going to go? Are they going to go 50 basis points in the next meeting and then another 50 and another 50, or they’re just going to use a long bond to actually what Sam said earlier and I forgot to bring it out is they’re using the long bonds also to kill the market. So it’s just like,what do you do?

TN: Yeah. The change to valuations we’ll see over the next three months seem to be really astounding.

AM: They’re just silly. Everything is so inflated at the moment. I can’t in good conscience, say get into this stock or get into that stock, because I know how is it going to run right?

TN: Exactly. Sam, anything to add on that?

SR: I love Albert’s point on KWEB. Think about what’s built into the risk there. You have the risk of the SEC delistings. You have the risk that appears to, at least on the margin, be waning. You have the threat of sanctions on China from them helping Russia. You have a lack of stimulus. You have shutdowns. There’s a lot weighing on that index on top of Fed, et cetera. There’s a lot weighing there on that. And you begin to have some of these calls, the geopolitical onion risks begin to be pulled back a little bit. And that to me is a spectacular risk reward in a market that is generally pretty low on the reward.

TN: Okay.

AM: I had one of my biggest clients from the golden guy. I mean, it’s gold and KWEB is what he’s seeing right now. That’s the only thing he wants to even touch, which is fascinating.

TN: Yes, I can see that. Okay. Next, this week ahead, we’ve got CPI out on Tuesday, which is expected to be about 7.9%. Sorry. And then retail sales on Friday, which is 0.3%. So it doesn’t feel like inflation is abating. But, Sam, you talked about, say, Restoration Hardware and other folks earlier. What concerns you guys have about inflation eating into retail sales, do we expect serious difficulty with retail going forward?

SR: Probably not this month. We’ve going to get the release and it’s going to be for March. And I haven’t seen what I would describe as a poor number coming from any of the major retail facing guys for March. I don’t think that number is going to be distressing at all. I think it’s much more of a . May-June story in terms of the economic numbers lag with a hard L. That’s somewhat problematic.

So I would say you’re not going to see the bad official numbers for a month or two. And on the CPI front, I’ll just throw this out there. And Albert can make fun of me for it, but I don’t really care where the inflation readings come in as long as it’s above 5% the Fed still going and it’s still going with its previous plan, and it really doesn’t care, quite frankly.

TN: That’s good to know.

SR: I just think it’s one of those it’s going to be a no. It’s going to be a no reaction type deal. Unless you get a huge break, then you might get a little bit of a come down on twos through sevens or something. But that’s about it.

AM: Yeah. I mean, as much as I want to make fun of Sam on that one. Yeah. Nobody cares about the inflation. Nobody cares about the inflation number right now until the election season starts really ramping up in about June, July. That’s when I agree with Sam with the retail sales are probably crater or starting to lag significantly in May and June. But yeah, prefer inflation. It’s just like everyone is expecting a 7.9 to eight point whatever, you know, so it won’t be a surprise.

TN: Great. Okay, guys, thank you very much for this. This is really helpful and I appreciate it. Have a great week ahead.

SR: Thank you.

AM: Thank you, honey.

Tags California, China, complete intelligence, cpi, Crypto, dallas, Fed, Flordia, florida, Guangzhou, Home Depot, houston, IPI, KWEB, Mosiac, New York, Nutrien, Russia, Spotify, texas, tony nash, Tuna, Twitter, us market, Walmart, week ahead

QuickHit

Quick Hit: Are you a deflationist or an inflationist?

Post author By admin
Post date October 9, 2021

Brent Johnson of Santiago Capital tweets, “If you believe additional QE is on the way, you are secretly a deflationist. And if you believe in the taper, you are secretly in the inflation camp.” What does he mean by that? Also discussed in this QuickHit episode:

What are the considerations around inflation this time?
“Negative velocity of money.” What does that mean?
Why are banks not the transmission mechanism that they should be?
How China plays a part in the world economy?
How long will the supply chain issues will be resolved?

Budget automation with Complete Intelligence takes the months of work into minutes, resulting in impressive revenue and cost forecasting accuracy. No code needed.

Learn exactly how much faster your forecasting, budgeting, and planning can take place:
https://www.completeintel.com/book-a-demo/

QuickHit

Cause and Effect: Are you a deflationist or an inflationist?

Post author By admin
Post date October 4, 2021

This QuickHit episode is joined by central bank and monetary policy expert Brent Johnson. He talks about inflationists versus deflationists and what makes these camps different in a time of a pandemic. What’s monetary velocity? And why banks are failing at their job, and why they’re not lending anymore money? Also discussed China and when supply chain issues will be resolved.

Brent Johnson is the CEO and founder of Santiago Capital, a wealth management firm. He works with about a dozen different families and individuals customizing wealth management solutions for them. He does that through a combination of separately managed accounts and private funds, also invest in outside deals, private deals, venture capital funds, and others. Brent have a focus on macro and loves the big picture.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel.

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

📊 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 September 28, 2021.

The views and opinions expressed in this Cause and Effect: Are you a deflationist or an inflationist? QuickHit episode are those of the guest and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Complete Intelligence. Any contents provided by our guest 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: Part of the reason we’re having this discussion. And is you posted something on Twitter a few weeks ago and I’m going to quote it and we’re going to put it up on screen. You said if you believe an additional QE is on the way, you are secretly a deflationist. If you believe in the taper, you are secretly in the inflation camp. Cause and effect. And I thought it was super interesting. Can you kind of talk through that with us and help us understand what you mean by that?

BJ: Sure. And before I get into that, I’m just going to take a step back because a lot of work I’ve done, a lot of the work I’ve done publicly and put out publicly over the last 10 to 12 years has really been about the design of the monetary system, how it works, how fund flows, you know, this currency versus that currency, what central banks do, etc. Etc.

And this is really a follow on from that and what I was, the point I was trying to get across in this particular tweet is that central banks are a reactive agency. They are not the cause. They are the effect. Now their policies can cause things to happen, but they are reacting to what they see in the market.

And so my point was if you think more QE is coming, then you believe they are going to be reacting to the deflationary forces that still exist in the economy. And so if they were to step back and do nothing, you would have massive deflation.

Now, the flip side of that is if you think that they’re going to taper and you think they’re going to pull away stimulus, then you’re actually an inflationist because you believe inflation is here, it’s going to remain. Prices are going to continue to rise. And the Fed is going to have to step back in reaction to those steadily higher prices.

And so I really get this across because I think there’s a huge battle between the people who believe deflation is next and the people who believe inflation is next. And I think it’s a fantastic debate because I’m not certain which one to come. I kind of get labeled into the deflationary camp, which I don’t mind for a few reasons. But I actually understand all the reasons that the inflationary arguments are being made. And I believe it was a few additional things happen. Then we could get into this sustained inflation. But until those things happen, I’m happy to be labeled into the deflationary camp. So I hope that makes sense.

TN: Yeah. So pull this apart for me. Inflation is ever and always a monetary function. Right. We hear that all the time. Of course, it’s hard to say something “always” is. But people love to quote that. And I think they misapply it in many cases. And I’ve seen that you’ve kind of pushed back on some people in some cases. So can you talk us through that and is this time different? Like, what are the considerations around inflation this time?

BJ: Yeah. So is this a perfect way to set this up because again, I understand the argument that those in the inflationary camp are making. And it would be hard to sit here and say we haven’t seen inflationary effects for the last twelve months. Prices have risen. Regardless of why or whatever prices have gone up. So I’m not going to sit here and deny that we’ve had inflationary pressures.

The question is what comes next. And I think what I would say with regard to the quote that you were just making, I think that was, I can’t remember who said it now, but it’s 50 or 60 years ago. And what I think was assumed in that quote was that monetary velocity is constant. And so you’ve seen these huge rises in the monetary base. But not just the United States, but Canada, Europe, South America, China and Japan.

And so the thought is that with that new money in the system, you’re naturally going to have inflation. But I think Lacy Hunt, who a fellow Texan of yours, does a fantastic job of showing, had the rate of monetary velocity stay the same. That is absolutely the case. But the reality is monetary velocity kind of took a nose dive starting about 20 years ago, and it just continued to lower and lower and lower.

TN: And it’s been negative, right, for the past couple years?

BJ: Yeah. It just continues to fall. And I think the rule is…

TN: Let me just stop you right there. “Negative velocity of money.” What does that mean?

BJ: What it essentially means is that new credit is not being created. And so the system is contracting. And this is really the key to it all. It’s the key to the way the monetary system is designed. It’s the key to the way it functions. And it’s the key to whether we’re going to have inflation or deflation next.

Because I do agree with the money, the inflation is always and everywhere, a monetary phenomenon, assuming that velocity is constant. But velocity isn’t constant. And it’s because of the way the monetary system is designed. And it’s because of the way that the Fed and other central banks have been providing stimulus.

Probably don’t have time to get into all the details of what a bank reserve is and whether it is or whether it isn’t money. But essentially what the central banks have been doing, especially the Fed, is re collateralizing the system. Now re collateralizing the system isn’t exactly the same thing as actually handing somebody else physical money. It sort of is, but it sort of isn’t. And it leads to this big debate on whether they’re actually printing money or not. It’s my argument that the Fed has been re collateralized the system and that has kept prices from continue to fall.

But in order to get this sustained inflation, I keep saying sustained inflation because I don’t want to deny, but we’ve had it. But to have it continue going higher, especially at the rate we’ve seen would require one of two things. Either the Congress has to come out and agree to spend another seven or $8 trillion, which this week is showing, it’s very hard to get them to agree to do that. They can’t even agree on 3.5 trillion and let alone another 6 to 7. Or the banks have to start lending. And the banks simply are not lending.

They lent last year because the loans that the banks made were guaranteed by the government. These were the PPP loans that everybody got.

TN: So. What you’re saying, it sounds to me, and correct me, what you’re essentially saying is that banks are failing as a transmission mechanism. So the government has had to become the transmission mechanism because banks aren’t doing what their job should be. Is that true?

BJ: That’s a very good way of putting it.

TN: Why? Why are banks not the transmission mechanism that they should be?

BJ: Well, they have the potential to be. And that’s what I say. The Fed has provided the banks all the kindling for lack of a better word, all the starter fuel to create this inflationary storm. But the banks haven’t done it. I would argue. Now there’s people to disagree with me. But I would argue that they don’t want to make a loan because believe it or not, banks don’t want to rely on getting bailed out, and they don’t want to make a loan where they are not going to get their money back.

Now, if you’re in an environment where businesses have been shut down either because of the pandemic or because of other laws or because of regulations that can’t afford all the regulations, whatever it is, you know, it’s hard to loan somebody a million dollars if you don’t know that their business is even going to be open the next day. Right.

So banks aren’t in the business of going out and making a loan and having and default on them. They want to get their money back. And I think that they would rather go out and buy a treasury bond that’s yielded one and a half percentage, than make a loan that pays them, three or four of them might go bad. Right.

TN: Okay.

BJ: So to me, that’s indicative of the deflationary forces that the banks who are closer to the money than anybody else, and typically the people that are close to money understand the money or benefit from the money the most, they are telling me from by their actions, maybe not their words, but their actions are telling me they don’t think this is a great investment.

TN: Yeah. I think we could talk about that point for, like, 20 minutes. So let’s switch to something else. So what you didn’t really mention is the supply side of the market in terms of inflation, meaning supply chain issues, these sorts of things. Right.

And so I want to focus a little bit on China. Now, there’s a lot happening in China, and I want to understand how that impacts your worldview.

In China, we’ve got the crypto regulation that’s come in. And the clampdown in crypto. We have a strong CNY, like an unusually strong CNY over the last six or nine months. We have the power supply issues. We have the supply chain issues. That’s a lot happening all at one time, at a time when a lot of people believe there’s kind of China has this clear path to ascendency, but I think they have a lot of headwinds, right. Of those kind of how are you thinking about those factors? The crypto factor, the supply chain factor, the power factor? How are you thinking about that stuff?

BJ: So I think about this a lot first of all. I mean, this is a probably, like it or not, for better force, the China-United States dynamic is probably one of the biggest macro drivers for the next ten or 20 years. It most likely will be. There’s nothing is guaranteed. But that’s probably a pretty safe bet that that’s going to be one of the main drivers. And so I think what you’re touching on as far as the supply chain, in my opinion, that is as big a driver as the “money printing” for the inflationary effects that we’ve seen for the last year.

You know, if you look at the efficiency with which the single global supply chain that Xi call it from 1990 to 2018 or 19, it’s pretty amazing, right. There’s one global supply chain, just in time inventory, you can predict with a very high level of certainty when you would get those things you ordered and at what price. But then with a combination of the US and Chinese antagonism and COVID, the supply chains are broke. And that makes it harder to get those supplies. And the timing of when you get them in the price, which you get to miss completely unknown or its delay, and the prices are higher.

And so I think that has led to a lot of the price pressure on commodities. Now, part of the reason that the decreasing supply push prices up was that demand stayed flat or went up it a little bit. And I think the reason it went up is a lot of people believe that the Fed would print enough money to cause demand to stay, solid and that China was growing and that they would continue. China has been the growth driver for the global economy for years and years. And I think a lot of people thought that China would continue to be that growth driver for these commodities and these other goods that were needed. And so if demand stays flat arise and supply gets cut, then price rises.

Now, I don’t think that China growing and ascending to economic hegemony or however you want to describe it is a given. I think they have more troubles internally than they would like to admit. And I think we’re starting to see that, with the Evergrande, real estate daisy chain of credit extension. You know, if you think that the US has a credit problem, take a look at China, they do as well. And it’s manifested itself nowhere more visibly than in the real estate market there and Evergrande.

Now, the problem is if they cannot send that credit contraction that is currently taking place in the Chinese market from a real estate perspective, then demand is not going to stay cloud. Demand is must start to fall, and demand starts to fall and some of those supply chain logistics start to get ironed out. Now, they’re not going to get fixed overnight. It’s not going to go back to the way it was 18 months ago. But if it even gets a little bit better and demand starts to fall, well, then you could have a move down in commodity prices and then move down in growth expectations.

And that is the way deflationary pressures could take whole. And as those prices start to come down, then you get more credit contraction. It becomes a vicious cycle both to the upside and to the downside. But based on the design of the monetary and I don’t need to keep harping on this. But based on the design of the monetary system, it is literally the stair step up in the elevator shut down. That’s just the way it’s designed. It’s an inherently inflationary system that it has to grow. Or if it doesn’t grow, then it crashes. And crash has always happened faster and steeper than the stairstep higher.

TN: They take longer, but steeper on the way up. Right.

BJ: That’s right. That’s right.

TN: Okay. So in terms of the supply chain issues, okay. I’m just curious, is this something that you think is going to resolve itself in three or six months? Do you think it’s something that’s with us for three years or what was I feeling out of this?

BJ: Some of it is gonna resolve itself in three or six months? And I think that will be a combination of just working out the kinks and demand falling. Right. I think that will help. But I don’t think it’s all going to get fixed in three to six months, and I think it might take three to six years to get the other part of it. And this is where I have to actually say that in the past, I’ve been somewhat critical of the people who called for stagflation because I kind of felt the top out, right? You couldn’t decide. So you just go down the middle.

But I actually think that that’s a very likely scenario. I think some things are going to inflate and some things are going to deflate and we’re going to have this kind of the stagflationary environment. I think the central banks are going to do everything they can to kind of offset those deflationary pressures. And in some cases, it will work. In some cases, they won’t. But the global debt, the amount of global debt and the global dollar… Is so big that deflationary scare, in my opinion, is always going to be there. And in my opinion, you can’t ignore it.

A lot of people just think, oh, don’t worry about it. Central banks, have you back. There’s a Fed put, don’t need to worry about it. I understand that argument, but I don’t think it’s correct. I think you do have to worry about it.

TN: Yes, I think that’s right. Brent, I would love to talk to you for another couple of hours. I think we could do it. And I’d love to revisit this in a few months. Thank you so much for your time for everyone watching. If you wouldn’t mind following us on YouTube and subscribing, we’d really appreciate that. That helps us get up to where we can promote more and other things. And, Brent, I really appreciate your time and really appreciate this conversation. Thank you very much.

Podcasts

Inflation, Just Transitory Not Hyper

Post author By admin
Post date June 24, 2021

The Fed just announced that hyperinflation is not happening in the US. Is this a transitory inflation and how long will this last? Where is the market headed now, then? What sectors and industries will be greatly impacted and how will they react to the vulnerabilities? Also, where is oil headed now that it reached $75 per barrel. Lastly, China’s clamp down on Bitcoin — how much impact does it have to crypto’s volatility? All these and more in this quick podcast with our CEO and founder, Tony Nash.

This podcast first appeared and originally published at https://www.bfm.my/podcast/morning-run/market-watch/inflation-just-transitory-not-hyper on June 24, 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 give us an idea of where global markets are headed, we have on the line with us Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. Good morning, Tony. Now, the big question, where do you think markets are heading? Which direction are they going to take after Powell’s House testimony that the specter of hyper inflation in the US is unlikely?

TN: First, I think hyper inflation in the US isn’t really possible because the US is a global reserve currency. It’s really, really hard to have hyperinflation in the US. Powell knows this. Everyone in the Fed knows that. But I think in terms of the importance of his speech with the House, it wasn’t really all that significant, partly because he came across as unnecessarily hawkish.

People have been trying to back off of that ever since his speech. Janet Yellen coming out today bringing things back to a middle ground on Friday. So we think we’ll see upside from here. We’re not going to see major upside. We do expect things to get a bit rocky later in the third quarter. But short of dump trucks of cash out on every corner or a major new breakout of Covid, I think we are on a gentle glide path for the next couple of months.

PS: So, Tony, can you help us distinguish the difference between temporary transitionary inflation and what is permanent inflation? Because Janet Yellen is in that transitionary stage. But at what point does it become permanent, in your view? Are the triggers there?

TN: Well, what’s misleading a lot of people today is we have what economists call these base effects. Last year, you saw really prices falling, right? You saw economic decline. So when you’re looking at prices today, people are giving you a price in year on year percentage terms. So things are up 30% year on year. Things are up 50% year on year. Actually, when you compare them to 2019 prices, depending on the asset, of course, plywood is different, these sorts of things.

But things are not really all that inflated given where they were in 2019, which was the last normal year that we had. And then when you look at the supply chain issues we’ve had, you do have some uptick in that. But some of this perceived inflation really is mostly a base effect more than anything else. And then when you layer the supply chain issues on top of that, then it’s really created a mess.

SM: All right. I hear you, Tony. That’s fair enough. However, rising prices in the US seem to be feeding into pockets of the real economy. Which sectors or areas do you see as most vulnerable to this?

TN: Housing, we’ve started to see people put off housing decisions as a result of this. It’s hitting food prices in a big way, especially protein. So pork, beef, chicken, these sorts of things. But we’re seeing corn, soybean and other crop prices rise pretty dramatically as well. Wheat prices are up pretty huge over the past week or so. And then automobiles, when you drive by a car lot, an automobile lot here, they’re really only half full because automakers have had to slow down for a number of reasons, whether it’s the metals prices or whether it’s the chip shortages, the auto manufacturers have had to slow down. So it’s really hit those three sectors very hard.

SM: These companies who are in these sectors, have they been able to actually pass on the rising cost to consumers?

TN: Some they have. But we’ve seen, some food companies or other folks pass them on in housing. Definitely, it’s been passed on directly and in automobiles, yes, but I think it’s a bigger supply chain issue than it is actually inflation issues. So they’ll pass on those costs in one certain form. But I don’t know that they’ll be able to get 100% or recuperate 100% of those costs.

SM: So are we potentially seeing some margin squeeze from these companies who are impacted in the coming quarters when we look at the earnings?

TN: Oh, yeah, absolutely. I think for companies who are complaining about the costs, but if they don’t see their margins squeezed, then we’ll know this is definitely temporary. But talking to almost any manufacturer here from polypropylene or polypropylene to ordering, industrial metals to wheat or something, everyone is feeling the pinch. But again, it’s as much access to supply as it is the cost of supply.

PS: So, Tony, you go upstream from propylene to actually Brent crude, and I think that’s hit $75 highest in 2 years. OPEC is meeting next week to decide whether they’re going to increase production. What’s your take?

TN: The U.S. crude prices are up a bit based on the drawdowns from storage in the U.S. and that’s on economic activity. States are finally kind of the states that had been holding back or finally opening up fully, which is good news for consumption. But with this Delta variant, there’s a real risk. It’s possible that Europe starts to lock down again as possibly parts of Asia start to lock down. Of course, we’ll have certain states in the U.S. that will probably move toward lock down again as well if it starts to impact.

So that’s a real risk on the consumption side. But for the OPEC+ group, they’re sitting on about 5.8 or 6 million barrels a day of production that they had before Covid. So they decided to cut this production so that prices wouldn’t go too negative or too far down. So they have that capacity that they can bring back online any time. If they discuss that next week, I don’t think OPEC wants to see oil prices because of the resentment it creates and the damage it does to consumers.

So I think there’ll be a lot of pressure on OPEC members to open up supply and bring prices down just a little bit. It’s not as if we need to see prices down in the 40s again, of course. But I think there’s a lot of fear that we’re going to see $80, $90, $100 oil and it is giving people a lot of reason for concern.

SM: All right. Well, we’ll be watching that meeting next week, Tony. And in a little bit of time that we have, one last quick question. What are you making about the volatility in Bitcoin that’s been happening this week? How much of it can be attributed to China’s crypto clampdown?

TN: Oh, sure. A lot of it can. About 70% of crypto mining globally happens in China. So as China clamps down, it really brings down the demand for Bitcoin and it brings down a lot of the pressure on the market. So it’s a little bit of regulatory and tax threat in the West, but it’s mostly the supply in China. And so a lot of that’s on the back of electrical grid pressures. So once the summer passes, the enforcement of that will likely lighten up and we’ll likely see more pressure on bitcoin, upward pressure on crypto markets.

SM: All right. Thank you for your time. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, giving us his views on markets. And I think what was interesting is that we can potentially see some companies being impacted by a margin squeeze because prices of certain goods, like you mentioned, meat in particular, lumber, corn or even, you know, all these downstream materials or byproducts of oil have gone up incredibly. And not all this price increase can be passed on to consumers because face it, the economy is just beginning to recover.

PS: Yeah, you know, because the these shubha transition. Right. Is it an issue of demand and demand is very high. Right. So maybe that when you can pass the price, but if it’s things like supply chain logistics as a result of, you know, breakages and, you know, it’s just all screwed up because of covid. Yeah, I think that’s very hard to pass on to the consumer. And that’s where the margin squeeze is going to take place.

SM: That’s right. And Tony mentioned automobiles as one of the areas where you’re going to see price rises. And I listen to this really fascinating podcast not too long ago on Planet Money, where they were talking about the used car sector. And the fact is that the they don’t have enough used cars to fill up the lots right now. So it really has that trickle down effect when you can’t, you know, produce more cars. Yeah, the second hand market will also suffer.

WSN: Apparently, Malaysia, our second hand market has also seen an uptick because of covid-19. There’s a reluctance for people to take public transport. So in the past, maybe you were you know, you hadn’t decided whether you want to buy a car, but now you’re kind of in that zone where you’re like, I need I need it because, you know, public transport, I’m not comfortable. Maybe this, you know, you think at the end of the day, why don’t I just get it rather sooner rather than later?

Plus, actually, interest rates are rather low. It’s only whether the question of whether you still have a job or whether how you feel in terms of sentiment.

PS: It’s fascinating because we talk about rising car prices and it’s also a lift to many things, lithium, SEMICON chips and all that. But on the flip side, we also talk about high oil prices coming through at the pump.

WSN: So we’re not so much for us because we are still subsidizing you run 95 Batla.

PS: Yeah, some of it’s going to be some of us. Pomerol 97.

SM: OK, I’m not one of those there.

PS: Well I do admit I do because my Volvo requires it. OK, in any case that is a challenge. I think in the long term it will hit the paycheck. Yeah. And the pocket later.

WSN: Well up next, we’ll be taking a look at the papers and the pottle. Stay tuned for that BFM eighty nine point nine.

Tags bfm, bfm 89.9, bfm malaysia, bfm morning run, bfm podcast, bfm the business station, Brent Crude, China, Crypto, DOW, Fed, Janet Yellen, NASDAQ, opec, Planet Money, SEMICON, Shanghai, tesla, US, wheat

Podcasts

Are Meme Stocks Just Relying on Momentum?

Post author By admin
Post date June 10, 2021

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.

Podcasts

American Carnage

Post author By admin
Post date February 9, 2021

In this Morning Run BFM podcast episode, Tony Nash justifies his pessimistic outlook of the US political environment on markets and the transition of the Reddit Army into a full-blown populist movement. Will this be a common theme in the US markets? And what does he mean about the 97% correlation between Bitcoin and gun sales?

This podcast first appeared and originally published at https://www.bfm.my/podcast/morning-run/market-watch/american-carnage on February 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: To find out where global markets are heading, we have on the line with us Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. Let’s have this little bit of discussion. Will the tussle between the populous investors and institutional shareholders lead to any real structural change in the way Wall Street behaves? Do you think this is going to be a common phenomenon?

TN: I do. I don’t think we’ll see much change politically because the funds themselves are very large donors for politicians. There really isn’t an incentive for politicians and regulators to change things. But the populism that we’ve seen in U.S. politics over the last four to six years or even 10 years, it’s growing into financial markets and people are really angry with Wall Street. They’re really angry with bailouts for funds and for banks.

This type of populist activism and distributing investment are going to continue and it’ll get more aggressive if the government doesn’t respond or if the funds respond aggressively and arrogantly. This could turn into an aggressive political movement. The funds and the regulators have to be really careful here.

PS: You really hit the nail on the head because if you see the backlash, you see the right wing with Ted Cruz, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on the left, both asking for investigations and reviews to this. Do you think the US government and the politics of both sides will be able to reconcile and find a solution to regulate, monitor this?

TN: They may have an “investigation.” I think nothing will happen. Again, these funds have deep pockets. They invest a lot of money, either directly or indirectly through shadow organizations and corrupt means. So zero will happen on this. Unless there is dramatic…

You guys have heard of Antifa in Malaysia, right? If Wall Street needs turned into an Antifa-like organization, and had violent protests, then maybe we would see some results. But there is absolutely no way short of violence in the streets that the US government… You will have Ted Cruz, you will have AOC talk about this. But this government will not respond to this because it’s in their interest to defend these funds.

PS: Tony, I’m gobsmacked. In just last month, we had an insurrection and impeachment and inauguration in the space of two weeks. Isn’t that like a big paradigm shift in the politics? Don’t you see any changes there?

TN: Here’s what I learned today and I’ll get to your point in just a second. There is a 97% correlation between the sale of guns and the price of Bitcoin in the U.S.. What does that tell us? It tells us there is an absolute lack of trust in institutions. People can’t trust law enforcement. They can’t trust politics. They can’t trust the central bank. Americans feel like they just can’t trust institutions. So they’re investing in Bitcoin and they’re buying guns. So there is a real frustration among Americans. They just absolutely don’t trust the government.

WSN: That’s an interesting point, Tony. But on the flip side, if I look at Biden’s administration. Let’s talk about his stimulus plans, because originally the target was a $1.9 trillion plan. But I think that’s probably likely to be scaled down, especially with the vaccination rollout. So what do your gut feel in terms of what the figure will be?

TN: The administration, unfortunately, has lost a lot of credibility because they two million or 20 million vaccines over the past week. They’ve come in saying that they had a better plan and then they’ve actually lost 20 million vaccines. This is supposed to be a Covid relief bill with more money for vaccines and more money to address Covid. But they can’t manage the resources they have today. People are really frustrated with that as this stupid $600 they’ve been promising for six months. Nobody even wants it now. People are so frustrated over this whole thing.

So will it be scaled back? Probably. You have Republicans in the Senate especially, who are being really stupid politically by pushing back on this. And you have Democrats who are pushing for stupid spending programs. Again, there is frustration. This is not just in Texas. This is across the country. Americans are so upset with government and so frustrated that they just want something passed and they want the least damage possible. They know it’s going to be a dumb bill. They know there’s going to be pork and they know there’s going to be corruption, but they want the least damage possible done with this.

WSN: But if I look at markets, it doesn’t seem like, you know, that that there’s any negativity or disappointment, right? Yeah. Because we are looking at, you know, the index also NASDAQ closed to an all time high. So are you saying that markets are reflecting this or, you know, there’s just too much optimism in terms of forward earnings?

TN: No, the markets are reflecting a bet on the central bank. They’re betting on the stimulus coming from the bill, passing through consumers and passing through businesses. And they’re betting on the the bailouts for different industries, on a weaker dollar, on a lot of things. That’s what they’re betting on. They’re not betting on earnings or on corporate health.

We suspect that the stimulus won’t be as strong as many had hoped and the central bank won’t be as accommodating as many hope and that there will be a pullback. We think there’s going to be something this quarter in terms of a pullback. But again, nobody is betting on companies or sectors.

WSN: All right. Thank you for your time. That was Tony Nash of Complete Intelligence, giving us his views on where global markets are heading and in particular on the U.S. government.

Some interesting points. Right Philip?

PS: I’m kind of lost for words for that. He really is pushing for this decade implosion of the once vaunted American institution.

WSN: He’s saying that there’s a lot of dissatisfaction with regards to the roll out of the stimulus plan. That it is very, very delayed. And people just like, hurry up, just sign the bill and hand out those 600 U.S. dollar checks. The longer you wait after a while, people just don’t seem to care about it.

But when I look at the markets, I’m somewhat still conflicted because I’m not in total agreement with him. I think markets are pricing in vaccine optimism. And on the back of that, there will be some corporate earnings, especially when you come to the tech companies. So is the whole of America unhappy? Well, we do know from the way the vote, is a very divided nation.

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Categories

Complete Intelligence is in partnership with:

Products

Resources

Company