Complete Intelligence

Login

Tag: KWEB

Categories
Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 08 Aug 2022: Low energy prices, China tech & stimulus, equity upside?

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

Energy has taken a huge downside hit this week, in the wake of the OPEC+ announcement, US refining capacity utilization declining, etc. What’s happening? Why are we seeing differences between physical and paper crude markets?

Also, there was talk months ago about a new energy supercycle. Is that real? With China-Taiwan-US tensions tighter than they’ve been for years, we’re seeing Chinese tech stocks just muddle through. We haven’t seen a major hit – as if China tech will see major fallout from these tensions – but we also haven’t seen a major bump – as if China is expected to stimulate out of this to win domestic hearts and minds.

Also, could possible government intervention to solve China’s mortgage credit crunch be holding back the broad stimulus we’ve all expected for a couple of quarters?

Key themes:

1. Low energy (prices)

2. China tech & stimulus

3. Equity upside?

4. What’s ahead for next week?

This is the 29th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.

Follow The Week Ahead panel on Twitter:

Tony: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd

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

Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Time Stamps

0:00 Start

0:30 Key themes for this Week Ahead episode

1:51 Moves we’re seeing in energy markets – why there’s a fall?

3:39 How much of the energy moves is seasonal?

6:58 EIA computer “glitch” problem

7:24 What happened in the refining capacity now at 91%?

8:30 Capacity utilization fall – is this a statement about the denominator or falling demand?

10:14 Is the commodities supercycle happening?

12:13 China and technology – KWEB is not falling or rising

14:00 Will the Chinese government help real estate developers? Will that take away from possible tech stimulus?

16:58 Viewer question: Is there still upside benefit to SPY?

22:18 How will be the start of the Fed pivot — 25 or 50 bps rise?

24:45 What’s for the week ahead? Listen to the podcast version on

Spotify here:

Transcript

TN: Hi everyone. Welcome to The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash, and today we have Tracy Shuchart and Albert Marko joining us.

We’re going to walk through a number of topics today. First is energy prices, low energy prices. We want to understand why that’s happening and what’s around the corner. Next, we’re looking at China tech and potentially the stimulus in China and how that will impact tech.

Finally, we want to look at equities. What remaining upside is there in equities right now, given the environment we’re in? Before we get started, I would like to ask you to like and subscribe to the channel. Also give us your comments. We’re very active and respond to comments, so please let us know what you’re thinking. If there’s something else we should be covering, let us know.

Also, we have a promo for our subscription product, CI futures, right now for $50 a month. With CI futures, you get equity indices, commodities and currencies reforecast every week. And you get all of those, plus about 2000 economic variables for the top 50 countries reforecast every month. So please check it out on the link below. $50 a month for CI Futures.

Okay, so guys, we’ve had a really weird week with the Pelosi visit to Taiwan, geopolitics and the risk associated with geopolitics is kind of back on. We’re not really sure exactly how that’s going to resolve, but I’m really interested in the moves we’re seeing in energy, Tracy, and we’ve seen energy really fall throughout the week and I’m curious why we’re seeing that, particularly with crude, as we’ve seen geopolitics dial up. I know there’s not a perfect correlation there, but we typically see crude prices rise a bit with geopolitics. 

TS: I think, it’s a combination of a lot of things. First of all, we’ve had which is ramped up to 200 million barrels being released to the SPR, which is fine initially, but we’re looking at the cummulative effect of this. In fact, we’re releasing so much so fast that now those barrels are actually finding their way overseas because we have nothing else to do with them. We can’t process that much right now.

And so we’re looking at that which is putting a damper kind of on the front end. We’re also looking at the fact that open interest is almost at the lowest in a decade, which means there’s nobody participating in this market. People are just not participating in this market.

In addition, we have physical traders that are completely nonexistent in this market anymore. They’re all trading via clear port on the OTC market as I’ve talked to actual physical traders, they don’t even want to be involved in this volatility.

And so that’s also taken a lot of open interest out of this contract. So this contract is easily pushed around because there’s just not of liquidity.

TN: How much of that is seasonal? How much of that is because it’s early August, late July, early August?

TS: It is seasonal. I will give you that because this summer is the summer lag. We generally see more participants in getting in September, and we’ll have to see how that kind of plays out.

But in general, the market is, this whole dive started in, was this market was factoring, we’re going to have this huge recession. Right? It’s going to be low berry session. Demand is going to go up.

And then we have this EIA discrepancy. The discrepancy was on gasoline demand. Actual gasoline demand versus what the DOE is reporting. Right? And ever since they had that “glitch,” where we had two weeks of no reporting whatsoever, those numbers suddenly changed.

And now they’re putting gasoline demand at below 2020 numbers at the height of COVID, which is to me,

not to sound conspiratorial, but to me, there’s just no way that we are below 2020 numbers. Right. And if you look at Gas Buddy demand, which is they look at a kind of a different look. What they look at is how

many gallons are being sold per station across the nation. And that’s how they kind of factor in what demand is. DOE is at the midpoint, right? So it’s like the midstream level. But those numbers should

eventually correlate. That discrepancy should eventually get together.

TN: So Gas Buddy is showing demand still growing, and DOE has it kind of caving. Is that correct? You know what I’m saying?

TS: Okay, yes. First of all, I think we need to look at the 914 numbers, the monthly numbers, which are definitely lagging. They’re too much behind, but they have been correct on production. Right? So I think they have weekly production at 12.1 million. Last 914 monthly report was at 11.6 million. So it is lagging information. But we have to start really looking at these weekly numbers and what the DOE is reporting and what they’re not reporting.

TN: If anything, what I’m seeing just observationally traffic seems to continue to grow. Like, I’m seeing more people going back into the office. I’m seeing more people take drives where they wouldn’t have taken long drives before. So what we’re seeing out of DOE doesn’t really match with what I’m seeing observationally. I could have selection bias, but it just doesn’t seem to match what we saw in April, May

of 2020. 

AM: Tracy is absolutely spot on on that. I actually had a few people note that the EIA computer “glitch” problems set all this thing off in the DOE inventory shenanigans. It’s starting to gain more traction with everybody. It just doesn’t add up. When things don’t add up, bad data comes in, and it’s politically advantageous for the moment try to get gasoline down, going into midterms. I mean, Tracy is absolutely 1000% spot on that assessment.

TN: So, Tracy, I want to ask you a couple of questions. We’ve got a chart on refinery capacity utilization, and it shows capacity utilization at about 91%. So last month we were talking about being at 94%. Now it’s at 91%. What’s happened? Has the Denominator going? 

TS: Well, that’s not actually a bad thing. Let me tell you that. Refineries operating at 94% 95% leads to a lot of problems. You’re going to see problems with maintenance, you’re stretching that capacity. Personally, I love anything over 90, 91. I’m much more comfortable with than 94 95%, which we got to, which is very stressing to me because you’re stressing those refineries, right. And that’s going to lead

to problems down the road. So for that to come down, it’s not a big deal to me, to be honest. Anything above 90, great. We’re good.

TN: Okay, so we’ve seen gasoline prices fall as we’ve seen capacity utilization fall. And so is that a statement about the, say, the denominator meaning the available capacity, or is that a statement about falling demand?

TS: I don’t think it’s a statement about necessarily anything. Okay. To be honest. Is the expectations around say that the gasoline price falling, is it expectations maybe around recession, but given the job numbers we got? Expectations about being around recession right when we’re seeing these prices fall. And I think we have a lack of participants in this market, especially lack of participants in the physical markets. The physical guys, like guys that trade for BP and Shell, which is where they’re just not in this market anymore because it’s too volatile, it’s too pulled around, and they can’t deal with that right now. So there’s nothing structurally changed about the physical markets right now.

You have to understand, too, is that the paper markets far outweigh the physical markets, meaning that there’s far more paper barrels traded than there are actual available physical barrels on the market

to be traded.

And when we look at a contract like WTI, which is actually physically deliverable, and we look at the market participants that are involved in deliverability, that is shrinking, shrinking margin, and then you look at something like the Brent contract, is completely just a financial contract.

So there’s a lot of hanky panky goingon in that market.

TN: Okay, now one last question while we’re on crude. Months and months ago, we kept hearing about this emerging commodities super cycle. And as we’ve seen commodities fall over the past few months, there have been some questions about is that really happening? So where are you? Do you think we’re in the early stages of another super cycle or do you think we’re just kind of modelling through?

TS: I actually think we’re still in the early stages of a super cycle. I mean, I think we’re kind of like I think my best comparison sake would be like, let’s look at the 1970s, right? And everybody’s looking at that ’73, ’74 when the oil embargo happened. But I actually think we’re closer to the ’67, ’69 era where we saw inflation kind of hit. Right. They tried to hide us into a recession, and then we had another peak in ’73, ’74 because issues with the market and then we have a third wave. So I actually think we’re only in this first wave of an inflationary cycle as far as commodities are concerned, okay.

Because we’re still in a structural supply deficit across not just the energy sector, but base metals, agriculture, et cetera. but you have to think your input cost for metals and for agriculture, it’s all energy.

So if energy is high to see inflation in energy costs, then you’re going to see inflation across all

of these commodities. We’re at $90. We were at negative $37 two and a half years ago. So to think that we’re crashing? You know.

TN: Okay, let’s switch over to China and technology and kind of talk through a few things with Albert. Obviously. Albert, we spoke earlier about Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan and US. China Taiwan affairs, and I’d recommend anybody view that that we published on Tuesday night US time. But I’m curious, Albert, as we look at and we’ve got KWEB up on the screen, which is an ETF of Chinese technology companies, it’s kind of middling. It’s not really falling. It’s not really rising. It seems like people are a little bit uncertain about what’s happening with Chinese tech. We have the closures of different cities. We have one of the big manufacturing cities that’s going zero COVID now.

And we obviously have the China Taiwan issues. What are your thoughts on China tech right now? And what should we expect over the next, say, two to three months?

AM: Well, over the next two to three months, I think China is going to be forced to stimulate. Once they stimulate names like KWEB, Alibaba actually, I really like Alibaba. There’s some good things happening there. I mean, the delisting stuff is a risk and it’s always been a risk, mainly because Gensler and Yellen have been trying to suppress the Chinese to stop stimulus because it hurts the United States and their plans to fight inflation.

So, yeah, I’m really bullish on KWEB. I really like it at 25 26 level. It’s not that far from where we are right

now. For the Chinese tech, it’s like, I don’t really think domestically, there’s too many problems domestically for KWEB. For me, it’s just all the delisting risk and that shot, the warning shot across the bow from the US. 

TN: Okay, so when you talk about stimulus, I want to understand a little bit of the substitutionality of stimulus. So if we have this big mortgage crisis in China where owners aren’t paying their mortgages,

and that’s even worse on the property developers, and there are trillions of dollars at risk there, do you think the Chinese government will intervene  and help those property developers? And if they do, will that take away from stimulus that could help technology companies?

AM: They will step in, but they’ll step in selectively for the most systemically important property developers. Not just the best connected, but the ones that touch the most debt and whatnot. So they don’t want things getting out of control. So for sure they will step in. I don’t think it will take away from the tech

sector at all. I think that the Chinese have been pretty pragmatic and diversifying how they get money into the system, whether it be other Asian countries, the US, Europe and whatnot. But they’re definitely in line right now to stimulate the economy going into the fall.

TN: Okay, great. If you’re trying right now and you’re talking about stimulus, that is to make up for kind of the COVID Zero close downs, but it’s also, I would assume, kind of winning some of those hearts and minds going into the big political meetings in November. Right, so you’ve whipped up nationalism with the Taiwan thing over the last couple of weeks and now you need bridge to get you to November. So you’re going to put out a bunch of stimulus to keep people fairly nationalistic and obedient. Is that fair to say?

AM: Yeah, that’s definitely fair to say. I think going even a little bit further than that is keeping the circle around Xi happy. That nexus of connected families that make money off the tech sector manufacturers. They need to be able to solidify it economically and stimulus will be targeted like that. And so when you say keep those families happy. You’re talking about skimming, you’re talking about sweet deals on contracts and that sort of thing.

TN: And I just want to make clear that doesn’t only happen in China. That happens in every country, right?

AM: Oh, every country you can imagine that happens. How politically connected with the donors, the political parties and so on and so forth. I just want to make clear to viewers. Like everybody. 

TN: Yeah, I just want to clear to viewers, we’re not just picking on China. This happens everywhere. 

AM: No, this is nothing negative towards China whatsoever. This literally happens in every country in every single country. Yeah.

TN: We had a question come in from a regular viewer talking about one of Sam’s calls. He’s not here, so he can talk behind his back today. The question was, Sam had talked about risks being to the upside a while ago for SPY, for the S&P 500. Now that we have had a mini rally, does he still see higher as the path of least resistance or is the risk reward fairly balanced here? I mean, we’ve seen a really nice uptick in the S&P and equities generally. Do you think there’s still upside benefit, or would you be a little bit hesitant in terms of the broad market?

AM: I’m bullish for a week, basically going a week, maybe two. I think that the CPI number is probably going a little bit lower than people think. And then all the peak inflation people are going to come out the woodwork and then they’re going to talk about Fed pivot, whether it’s real or not. I don’t think the Fed actually pivots. I think they just build a narrative of a pivot, if that makes sense, to rally the market.

But going forward, the economy is not a good footing. The job numbers are just not accurate. It’s a purely political headline for Biden going into the midterms. CPI is going to follow the same suit. They’ll probably have a 50 basis point rate hike in September and say that they’re slowing down. And whether it’s real or not. 

TN: I want to question you just to push back a little bit. When you say the economy is not on a good footing, what do you mean? Help me understand how it’s done on a good footing? 

AM: Well, the whole jobs? Listen, 20% of people don’t have a job. 19% of people have two jobs or more. You’re sitting there making this glorified headlines thatBiden is great for the job market and the economy, but it’s just not accurate. We have people that are struggling paycheck to paycheck more than any time in the last 20 or 30 years. So the underlying economy, forget about the top half that are millionaires that are buying whatever, the bottom half of the country is an absolute recession. So that’s what I’m saying the economy is not good.

TS: I mean, I totally agree with Albert. I mean, I’ll make a case for the bullish side. Let’s put it this way. So not a single trades work this year. Average hedge fund scrambling on how to salvage this year. There’s no other choice, really, but to get long. I mean, we have long going girlfriends been shell shocked. Font, shitty year. Value guys waiting to buy the dip in cyclicals. So I think that until when November comes and we have redemptions and these guys are faced with losing money from clients, I think that right now they have no other choice than to buy the dip, which is really interesting because that coincides with midterms. But not to put on my tinfoil hat there. So that’s my case for we may see a little bit higher than people that anticipate.

Even though I agree we’re still in a bear market. Albert makes a ton of good points, totally agree with

him 100% on that. But for the next few months, we may be looking at different kinds of things, especially because we also have the CTAs that are still super short.

So we have the possibility that we could see a short squeeze now if hedgies start

eating up the market and… This is exactly what the administration wants to see, because they want to see the S&P higher going into Midterm electric if it makes them look great. Of course.

AM: And Tracy is right. And this goes back into the oil numbers from the DOE and the EIA Shenanigans. They lower gas, they try to get inflation lower. They rally the market going into Midterms. It’s just the way it is. Now, going back to the economy, real quick, Tony, I see across the street the US consumer credit was $40 billion. I mean, people are spending and collecting debt like it’s going out of stock.

TN: That’s not a good number. You saw my tweet this last week about the $15 grapes. I mean, that sounds ridiculous, but people are having to. I talked to people about their electricity bills and they’re doubling and tripling over the last few months. And so people are having to do this. Rents are doubling in New York and so on and so forth. So it’s hitting everybody. And people are having to tap into consumer credit just to make ends meet.

AM: Just for the viewers, Tony, the forecast was 27 billion. It came in at 40.

TN: Wow. That’s a slightly overestimate, I would say. Let me ask you a quick question about the Fed pivot. Okay. You say the Fed is going to kind of act like they pivot but not actually pivot. So would that mean and I know everyone’s been on Twitter today or on social media saying, oh, the job’s number puts 75 basis points in focus again, all this stuff. But would the start of a pivot be 50 or 25 basis point rise?

AM: The start of a narrative of a pivot would be 50. But let’s just be honest. Inflation is not going away. They can fake a CPI number, maybe one, maybe two months. But come October, December, January, and inflation is raging, nine point whatever, 9.5%, 10%. They are going to have to keep going 75 basis points. 

TN: So when you talk about a pivot, you’re talking about the beginning of a pivot, maybe a 50 basis point rise in September or something just to kind of ease nerves off a little bit?

AM: Yeah, that’s exactly what it is. It’s just the beginning of a narrative to move the market. It’s all it is. 

TS: Okay, if we went 50 instead of or even 25 instead of 75, which the market is expecting, the barn market would freak out. 

TN: Now what happens to commodities in that case, Tracy, if we’re in September and we go 50? You’re

going higher.

AM: Okay, this is the problem I keep telling screaming people and why I didn’t think that’s why I didn’t think this rally was a good idea is because all of a sudden now you’re going to create this stupid pivot narrative and do 25 or 50 basis points. But then, like Tracy just mentioned, commodities are going to rip. What’s that going to happen then? We’re going to have stage two of inflation coming around in 2023. That’s going to make this like nothing.

TN: Yeah, but as long as it happens after November, I think. Everything’s fine. Right. No, seriously, we have to think we’re in that. We’re in those closures.

TS: You have to think everything is political right now. So every decision is political right now and you have to factor that into kind of your investment thesis right now.

AM: Tracy’s absolutely right. I was just talking to a client. I said I don’t want to hear anything after November of this year. This era is this era right now. After November is a different era. We’ll talk about that accordingly in the next month. But until now it’s just a pure political game.

TN: What are you guys watching in particular for the week ahead?

AM: CPI. I think the CPI comes in a little bit lower than people expect and will rally the market for another 100 points. Like a seven handle or something? I think it’ll be a seven handle.

TS: I mean, everybody is watching CPI, I agree. I’m watching CPI as well. I think what’s really interesting going into this next week is I would start looking at Basin Industrial Metals and miners at this point because I think that they are lagging crude, they have been lagging crude oil. But we’re kind of starting to see a little bit of turnaround. So my focus really is going to be on base and industrial metals.

Categories
Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 03 Aug 2022: Pelosi, China, & Taiwan

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

There’s all this buzz around Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan. What is she doing there? Why all the stress? Why is China upset?

Also, Yellen got China to stop the stimulus. If China starts the stimulus, will that be a really good thing for Chinese equities? And what does that do for the CNY?

We also discussed the likelihood now with Pelosi’s visit that China will start stimulating. And what does that mean for oil and gas imports and Europe?

Will China try to hurt US companies that are in China? Do you think they could push against ex-pats in China and make life difficult for them? What are possible aggressive moves that China could take? Like cyberattacks?

There have been some potential whispers of China taking over some of Taiwan’s small islands to make a statement. Is that possible? And will they take it on other countries like India? What is the likelihood of China and the US in direct warfare engagement in the next twelve months?

Listen to Spotify here:

This is the 28th 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/

Chris: https://twitter.com/BaldingsWorld

Transcript

TN: Hi, everyone, and welcome to the Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash, and we’ve got a special Week Ahead right now. We’re joined by Albert Marko and Dr. Christopher Balding to talk about the Taiwan-China issues around Nancy Pelosi’s visit. 

Before we get started, I want to let you know about a special we’re having for CI Futures. We’re doing CI Futures for $50 a month. With CI Futures, we forecast about 2000 economic variables every month and about 900 market variables (currencies, commodities, equities) every week. That $50 deal is for the next couple of weeks. And you don’t even have to take a year-long commitment. For the next couple of weeks, you do it a month at a time, and it’s $50 a month. 

So let’s get onto the show, guys. Thanks again for joining. I appreciate it. 

I want to get into there’s all this buzz around Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan, and I want to take a step back and go, why all the stress? Why is China upset? Because I think there are a lot of loaded assumptions in the discussions that are happening. So can you guys talk us through a little bit, maybe? Chris, if you want to start, why is China so upset about this?

CB: So there’s the full history of the claim of Taiwan as Chinese territory. They refer to it as a Chinese province. That’s the general background. I’m going to assume that most of your listeners or watchers already know that.

However, if we jump ahead to this specific visit, to be honest, I’m a little bit mystified as to why this

specific visit has turned into this small crisis. Trump was sending a cabinet secretary and undersecretaries. There’s been a steady stream of Congresspeople to Taiwan. So why this specific visit? I think there’s very reasonable speculation we can go through those. But why this specific visit has turned into what it has, I think there are probably only a couple of people that could answer that question. 

TN: Okay, Albert?

AM: Well, to expand on that, I can understand why the Chinese have a little bit more drama involved in this visit simply because the economic situation in China at the moment is so dire for Xi that they need a little bit of a distraction just to get the headlines out of the way at the moment.

TN: Yeah, I think that’s a good point. And when I think about this, it’s, yes, you can go back into all the history and the UNC, the 1971 and all of this stuff, but I think my view is democrats need a distraction for the midterms. You have the Afghanistan anniversary coming up, all of these things coming up. A bill was just passed that either does or doesn’t raise taxes on a lot of the population. There’s a lot of discussion around that. 

Are we in a recession? Not a recession. I think this is a convenient foreign policy issue for Democrats to grab onto before the Midterms to raise some external issues that are a little bit more mysterious for people, a little more exciting. Will there be a war? That sort of thing. 

And I think, Albert, you’re exactly right. With the November meeting coming up in Beijing, where Xi is supposed to be this golden boy and a lot more power and all this stuff, the new Mao or whatever, I think China’s economy is in a horrific state. I think the provinces and cities are not falling in line with Beijing, and I think politics in China is terrible. So I think this helps galvanize people in China, it helps galvanize people in the US. And I think it’s more of a convenient event than anything.

AM: It is a convenient event. Other issues are going on within China with the actual US.

Fed and Yellen are Yellen got them to capitulate to stop stimulus to fight inflation. So from the Chinese perspective, they’re a little bit they feel a little bit betrayed here. Seeing Nancy Pelosi

nude sunbathing on Taiwanese beaches, it’s like, what are you doing?

TN: Yellen got them to capitulate, to stop safely. So you’re saying Yellen got China to stop stimulus? 

AM: Yeah. I don’t know if it was direct or indirect, but Xi warned them to don’t stimulate while we’re trying to combat inflation. Look what happened to the Russians. And from the Chinese elite perspective, looking at the oligarchs in Russia, being completely isolated from the rest of the world, that’s just something that a pill that they didn’t want to swallow, and they were glad to hold off stimulus up until this event. Now, I don’t know, after this event, the Chinese might renege on that gentleman’s deal, but we’ll see at this point.

TN: Okay, let me pursue that in a minute because that’s interesting. So if you’re saying that the Chinese were holding back stimulus because of a quiet bargain, and they reverse on that and they start, as I’ve been expecting them to do for the last six months, just dump truckloads of cash on the squares in Chinese cities, if they start doing that, that could potentially actually be a perfect thing for Chinese equities, right? 

AM: Well, of course, but it’s negative for the US inflation and the commodities will start ripping. It’s an asymmetric shot against the US. So it’s something that they have in their toolbox and they haven’t used yet, but they certainly could after this.

TN: Okay, and so what does that do for the CNY, guys? If China starts stimulus, if it’s fiscal that appreciates CNY, at least from a textbook perspective, right? 

AM: Yeah, from the textbook perspective, sure. They control whatever they want to set the CNY at, so, I mean, I can’t see them allowing it to shoot up too far just because they are an export-dependent economy. 

TN: Okay, Chris.

CB: I just wanted to circle back to what we were talking about before jumping back to the CNY issue because this has been a real puzzle about they’ve been pretty restrained, and there are all kinds of questions as to why that is. 

And again, I wish we could provide good, solid answers about that. I think a lot of the issues, like with Taiwan and stuff like that, I think there’s like, Tony, you mentioned the economy. I think that’s distinctly possible. I think it’s also one of those issues. If you go back right after the first of the year, they changed the language about reunification and how they were going to solve that problem for the new era. 

What’s the new era? It’s Xi getting the third term. So is it possible that the economy is, like, pushing this along, egging it forward, so to speak? Yeah, I think that’s possible. I also think there’s much more like Xi has staked his credibility on, I’m making China great again, come hell or high water, if I have to drive it off a cliff to do it. That’s part of what you’re seeing.

AM: Yeah, I agree with Balding on that one. The only caveat that I would throw in there is that would be exactly the case up until the Ukraine situation where Russia got their butts handed to them. 30,000 troops lost, flagship battleship gone, sunk.

From the PLA perspective, it’s like, hey, what happens if we lose? Because it’s not a 0% chance, right? What happens if we get decimated? Our military could be set back 50 years, 100 years. And I think that at this point, it’s too much of a cost for them to take an adventure in Taiwan.

CB: Yeah. I will say you and I disagreed on this previously. Like, what were the risks? Let’s assume Ukraine had never happened. I would say there’s probably a not immaterial chance of something

happening with China and Taiwan in the next, let’s say six to 18 months.

At this point, I definitely would push that back a little bit. If something’s going to happen, I think, within the next few years. But absolutely. I think they’re going back to the drawing board because they see what’s happening to Russia in Ukraine, and they’re like, there’s absolutely no way in hell this can happen to us. 

AM: Yeah, they saw Afghanistan as a point where they could probably take some territory away from the US sphere of influence. But then again, Ukraine happened, and that threw everything through, wrenching all the plans. 

TN: Okay, so let’s talk about that a little bit. The Russia-Ukraine angle is interesting. So when sanctions were put on Russia, Russia can do okay without sanctions, not thrive, but can survive. But China is so intermingled in global trade that if sanctions are put on China, it could be very difficult for them. Right. Or what am I missing? 

AM: It could, but they’re the world’s manufacturing base, so it’s like, you put sanctions on them, they’ll put sanctions, they’ll do something asymmetric, and it’ll hurt the West more than the West can hurt China, to be honest. I mean, The US can handle it. The Europeans can’t. They’re already in dire rates. 

CB: The other thing that I would add to that is people make the sanctions argument. I don’t buy the sanctions argument for two specific reasons. One is basically what they import. The bulk of what they import from the rest of the world is raw materials. And that’s not coming from Western Europe, Japan, or other places like that.

Then the high-tech products that they do import, let’s say very high-grade chips, are going into things like iPhones and then being re-exported right away. Okay, so they’re not on an import basis highly dependent on the rest of the world. 

They’ve made two bets with that in mind. Number one is that they can convince people not to block their exports, meaning Chinese exports to their country. Number one. And then also that other countries are so dependent upon them that they can’t. Okay?

What would happen to Walmart during the Christmas season if they couldn’t buy from China? Okay.

It’s a simple example, but it does throw a monkey wrench in there. 

AM: Caterpillar is another one. The Chinese have done a marvelous job of using US agricultural companies against the US political system. So they’ve got a noose around them. Buick also. GM, Buick, Caterpillar. I can name half a dozen companies. Yeah.

TN: My main focus in terms of sanctions was food. These other things, of course, they’re importing goods, really, largely to be transformed and re-exported. Food is the main issue that I would think would be damaging to China, potentially. 

AM: Yeah, that was always one of my main points of contention about a war starting with Taiwan is those ports being shut down in the eastern part of China, it would be devastating. They would have food and security problems. The Chinese middle class has been growing. They don’t want rice anymore. They want noodles and dumplings. So they have a persistent food issue that just gets worse and worse every year.

TN: Right. Okay, so let’s go into this. I saw Pelosi kind of pull up into that. I think it was the Grand Hyatt she’s staying at in Taipei. And really, what is she doing there? Like official, non Official. What do you think she’s doing there?

AM: That’s a pure distraction from the midterms in the economy in the US at the moment. It’s an easy distraction. They know China is not going to do anything outlandish. They’re a pretty pragmatic country when everything is said and done anyway. So it’s like, what negative is there for them, for Pelosi and the Democrats at the moment?

CB: Here’s the only reason I’m going to disagree with you, and you said something very similar earlier, Tony. Here’s. The only reason I’m going to disagree with you is that this assumes a level of evil genius out of the White House and maniacal thinking that I just don’t think they’re capable of, okay? Okay. Again, I could be wrong.

AM: I just don’t see these guys as the evil genius that says, hey, we need a distraction, what can we do?

I don’t think it’s an evil genius. I think that’s a little bit too strong. The game of scapegoating and distractions in the beltway is as old as time itself. The professionals at it. They can see what they want to do to pull people’s eyes away from one issue onto another and they have the media under their grips so they can do anything. They want to distract people. So the evil genius part comes in what are, steps 2, 3, 4, and 5 after this? Because now the Chinese can retaliate and I don’t think the US is prepared for that.

TN: In what ways? 

AM: Well, I mean if the Chinese decide to start simulating next week and commodities start ripping, inflation in, the US is going to have a ten print, 10% print on CPI come October, November, then what? You’re in the smack middle of the midterms looking at 10% inflation and you’re losing 50, 60 seats in the House and you’re losing the Senate and then you have the Republican take over and start throwing out hearings against Joe Biden every week like they did Trump. It’s chaotic. 

TN: Okay, so that’s an interesting scenario. Okay, I want to ask about that and then I want to ask another question about a potential reason for visiting. But you’ve mentioned that a couple of times. So what’s the likelihood, since they’ve said that they’ll undertake serious pushback, is there a likelihood that they’ll do that? Do you put that at a 50, 60, or 70% likelihood or do you think they’ll continue to hold?

AM: I think after this visit by Nancy Pelosi, it’s a greater than 50% chance that the Chinese start stimulating a little bit earlier than scheduled with commodities ripping.

TN: Okay, so that means more oil and gas imports, more pressure on gas prices, and diesel prices. All this would hurt Europe too? 

AM: Oh, of course. Europe has got massive energy issues going forward and they’re unsolvable within six months. 

TN: Okay, so so far I’m hearing potentially bullish Chinese equities and potentially bullish commodities, particularly energy, commodities, and industrial metals, right?

AM: Oh, absolutely, yeah. Full discretion, I’m going into KWEB. I have Baba at this low with this Pelosi landing. So for me, it’s just like Chinese equities have been battered with no stimulus. We’re down to the point. Yeah.

TN: Okay, so on tech, you mentioned tech. Is it possible that with the chips act just passing in the US, this is the one that supports semiconductor companies for putting operations in the US? Is it possible that there is a message being passed to TSMC or any of the strategic industry guys in Taiwan by Pelosi and her staff? Is that a possibility? And if so, what do you think it would be? 

CB: Absolutely. I would say that that’s one of the things I don’t know if you caught this statement from the chairman of TSMC, but he gave an interview just a day or two ago and he said, “China, if you invade, like all of our plants on the island are dust, they’re worthless. There’s nothing there.” Because I can guarantee you that. I’m sure that the US Air Force would have the coordinates for every TSMC plant that it’s like, hey, we’re going to make sure that China doesn’t get them. I’m sure that TSMC, at this point, their reputation is being a pretty well-run company, very attuned to security issues. And so I’m sure that they have multiple redundancy plans and multiple security plans to address that if China is locked in. So you have to think that TSMC, all the way down to all their key suppliers and things like that, are in some type of meeting here with Nancy.

AM: Yeah. I’m not very keen on this chip sack bill. I think it’s just fireworks and stringers and ticker tape raid. But there are EPA issues to deal with when chip-making also. So no matter what, whatever they want to throw out for legislation, as long as the EPA is hampering manufacturing in the United States, manufacturing is going nowhere, at least for the next five to ten years in the United States. So this chip act, although it gives a little bit of pressure, don’t think it’s going to be that big of a driver in the next five to ten years. 

TN: Okay. I want to talk to you guys a little bit about the pushback that China may give to US companies. So China already blocked a $5 billion battery investment from a Chinese company in the US. That was just announced today, and those batteries were supposed to support Tesla and Ford, I believe. Do you think China may try to hurt US companies that are in China? Could they directly take action against, say, Tesla or GM or Ford or GE or any of the American companies that are sitting in China? Do you think they could push against, say, ex-pats in China, and US ex-pats in China and make life difficult for them? 

Because if we look, for example, at what happened in Russia, we have a lot of Western companies that have abandoned their operations in Russia over the last eight months. Right? Is it possible that American companies get pushback from the Chinese government? 

Because if I think of what the Chinese government did to Japanese companies in 2012 if you remember that. It was very aggressive. They were instigating protests against Japanese companies, Japanese expatriates, and Japanese government officials. Could they instigate that against the US? Companies? And could they push us Companies to just give up their operations in China? 

CB: Well, the only way I would rephrase that is how would that differ from normal standard operating practice? Even within the past couple of years, there’s been a massive flood of not just Americans, but all foreigners out of China. And these are everything from journalists to just basic school teachers, English teachers. Okay? So it doesn’t even matter if you’re a sensitive national or in the sensitive industry or what China deems is sensitive. 

This goes for businesses as well. You heard stories about companies saying, oh, well, I have 10 million, $50 million of profits I can repatriate. I’m going to close down my China plant and go to Vietnam. And basically what they do is they just freeze everything and said, oh, you have an unpaid tax bill, coincidentally, the same amount of money that you were going to repatriate. And so they just have to walk away from everything or sell it for one dollar or something like that. 

So when you talk about that, I think that’s entirely fair. I think that’s going to happen. I think the only people that are going to effectively remain there till the end are the Shells of the world that didn’t get out of Russia until the bombs and the missiles started flying. I think it’s going to be the same with China.

TN: Are you saying that you think some US companies will in the next, let’s say, two to three years, abandon their China operations? Do you think that’s feasible? 

CB: Oh, yeah.

TN: Okay. 

CB: I think it’s already been happening. It’s not announced. You see a couple of announcements here and there. You hear about many more talking to people that are still there. But yeah. 

TN: Albert, what do you think about that? 

AM: Yes, they will. There’ll be certain companies that they go after depending on whatever political calculations they can throw at the US, for sure, without question. They’ve done this. I mean, Christopher said they’ve done this in the past. Nothing new. 

TN: Right. So how would that start? Would they try to push aggressively to localize leadership? I know a lot of that leadership is already localized, but would they almost make it mandatory for leadership of, say, US companies to be Chinese and then kind of cascade that through? Or what would the early phases of that look like?

AM: I think the early phases would be phantom tax violations or some kind of fines or fees that just pop up out of Chinese mountains. Who knows? Do you know what I mean? So I think that’s the first thing you’d want to look at if they start doing it.

CB: Yeah. And again, what you’re talking about, I think, is basically what’s been happening for the past couple of years is whether it’s the phantom tax bill, whether it’s all senior leadership has to be Chinese or party members or all those kinds of things. I mean, when you’re asking about that in the future, it is like, well, how would that differ from the past two to three years?

TN: Right. It feels like we’re on the precipice of that. And some of us have been talking about kind of the end of the Asian century for probably the last five to eight to ten years. And China is what seems slow, but very rapid decline in terms of its ability to grow. Not the fact that it’s not already huge, but its ability to continue to accelerate growth. That’s gone. Those days are gone. Right.

And when growth stalls out, the opportunity becomes a zero-sum game. And it’s about market share. It’s about getting your piece of the pie. Not a growing pie, but a stagnant pie. And that’s when things get very difficult in authoritarian countries. Right?

CB: Well, I think to add upon that, they were following the Asian growth model of build, in simple terms, run large trade surpluses, controlled currency, build apartments. It’s a pretty tried, true path. But one of the things that are very different is if Malaysia runs a large fiscal surplus, nobody cares. If Taiwan runs a significant trade surplus, some people care, but whatever. 

For every percentage point of GDP in trade surpluses that China runs at this point when you’re the second largest economy in the world, that is a massive, massive number, not just against your economy, but against the global economy. And that’s going to create massive, massive dislocations elsewhere. 

And then the other thing is that when your only source of growth is basically building apartments, and now they’ve got like 20% to 25% of these apartments all over the country, empty and household debt that is significantly above the OECD average. It doesn’t make any sense, and this is what they’re running up against. Okay.

AM: To take that a step further, it’s like if you have low growth and your economy starts in the waiver, how do you fund a growing military to combat the United States on a global level? The math doesn’t add up. Very difficult.

TN: Okay, I want to move next on to things like cyberattacks. Chris, I know that you’re very focused on kind of the IT side of what the Chinese government is doing. Can you talk us through some of the potential, maybe aggressive moves that China could take in the wake of this?

CB: Sure. So there are all kinds of things. And one of the things, you saw today where they were looking at, they shut down the Taiwanese Prime Minister’s website. But that’s, to be honest, small potatoes. 

The type of thing that you would look at, and you’ve seen this a little bit in Ukraine is where they went after things like nuclear reactors and other things like that. So if you’re looking at this, one of the types of things that you would be looking at would be, for instance, Taiwan being an island, there’s a handful of spots where cables come ashore. So what would you be looking at? Because if you wanted to make it hard on Taiwan, that might be something that you would go after. 

If you had the capability, and they are very likely due to some capacity, you would be looking at putting bugs in the TSMC type of production capacity. So those would be the types of things to narrow it to Taiwan. But generally speaking, if you aren’t being hacked by China, that basically just renders your place in the universe irrelevant, almost, because they’ve pretty much gone after everybody.

TN: Right. Albert, what do you think? 

AM: Yeah, I mean, the Chinese are prevalent in the cyber terrorism space. They’re out there stealing trade secrets and corporate secrets all over the place, especially in the United States. And I don’t foresee that slowing down at all. If anything ramping up, and they’re good at it, and we have lacked security in the United States, and it needs to be tightened up.

TN: Right. And we intentionally, for the viewers, did not record this on Zoom. That’s an indication of some of the thoughts around there. 

Now, guys, there are some islands between Taiwan and China, and there have been some potential whispers of China taking over, say, some islands, some of Taiwan’s small islands to make a statement. Do you think that’s possible?

AM: It’s possible. I don’t understand why they would try even risking that. What if they lose a few ships?

What if they lose 1000 or 2000 troops? It’s like all of a sudden you look weak and then you’re going to be forced into a position to do something bigger. It would make no sense from my perspective.

CB: The only reason I kind of disagrees is that there’s a handful of some of these very small islands, so I doubt that they have any military hardware there. And some of them are literally, I think, as close as like 10 miles off the Chinese mainland like that. They’re just that close. And so just as a symbolic act, something like that wouldn’t surprise me at all.

AM: It won’t surprise me at all. I’m just saying anything closer to the Taiwanese actual island, I would be wary of seeing the Chinese try to take them. 

TN: I spent a week on one of those islands in 2009 waiting out of typhoon, and it was an experience, but I think it’s feasible. It’s an island off of Taidong, which is no, that’s on the southwest side. They wouldn’t do that. They would do it on the I was on the southeast side. They would do it on the southwest side or the northwest side. But there are lots of islands, very small islands off of Taiwan.

Okay, good. What else I think do we need to be thinking about here? There has been talking of the Biden administration removing trade tariffs and this sort of thing on China. Do you think that could be something that the administration aggressively goes after to kind of compensate China? Or do you think this would maybe solidify those tariffs? 

AM: I don’t think so. Honestly, I would rather see what the rhetoric is around the oil market price cap that they’ve been talking about with G7 and the China terrorists might fall into that realm in negotiations. I would want to see what China’s reaction is to the oil cap at the moment.

CB: I’d be very skeptical at this moment of some type of tariff rollback because for them to… The White House has very badly managed this entire situation where they created a situation where if she went or if she didn’t go, they were losers. They’re not looking bad. And so if they were to roll back tariffs at this point, I think they would get they would get slaughtered, even among the Democrats at this point. So I think that’s very unlikely. 

But look, Jake Sullivan is the guy that a decade ago was proposing, what do you say we walk up to China and give them back Taiwan in exchange for peace in our time? So with these guys, anything is possible.

AM: This is the worst foreign policy cabinet I have ever seen in my life. No one’s even close second at the moment. And that kind of commentary by Jake Sullivan is just unbelievable.

TN: Yeah. Okay, guys, so let me ask you kind of one final question, and you have to answer it with one of these two answers you can’t equivocate in between. Okay. The likelihood of China and the US in some sort of direct warfare engagement in the next, say, twelve months, is it closer to, say, 20% likelihood, or is it closer to 70% likelihood?

AM: 20% in my opinion. 

CB: 20%. 

TN: Oh, good. Okay, so do you think it’s greater than 20% or less than 20%?

AM: I’d say less than 20%. Okay. I would again say less than 20%,

CB: and I would say if you were to draw that out, 24, 36 months, I see it going up, probably steeper as time goes on.

TN: Okay, so that’s fair. So there’s a risk all around, right? We’ve got economic suffering globally. We’ve got inflation globally. We have whatever’s happening post-COVID trying to be figured out globally. We’ve got political uncertainty globally. So we’ve got risk and uncertainty everywhere. Adding a conflict to that mix would not be positive for anybody. 

CB: And the one thing I would say is, even though I say less than 20%, that’s not like a firmly, deeply held conviction. Because if you’re talking about risk, I would have what I would call wide error bands in a lot of these situations. Look, we talk about, like, what is Xi going to do? Xi could say, hey, America is distracted by Ukraine. They got extra troops there. They’re shipping all kinds of weapons. Now’s the time to go to Taiwan. I don’t think people do that. That’s also not crazy to speculate. Yeah,

AM: I would have to agree with that because I never thought that Putin would try to take Kyiv with so few troops, but here we are, him making a vital mistake. And sometimes leaders make bad mistakes because they have a bunch of yes men around them. Yeah. Let me ask you one very quick question.

TN: Do you think there’s a possibility that China kind of takes it out on somebody else? Do they have a dust-up maybe with India to show strength at home while avoiding it with the US? Or something like that? Do they lash out to somebody else so that they can kind of flex muscles at home? 

AM: Yeah, they could, but I mean, honestly, the Indians are not people to be trifled with, to be honest. They are itching to take on China if they show any kind of aggression. So I don’t see who they can pressure to say they’re big, bad China at the moment. I don’t even think they should be doing that. They should be figuring out their economic situation more than anything else. 

TN: Xi Jinping’s role model is Mao. And Mao ultimately was a failure and a pariah in his own country by the time he died. Right. So I don’t think Xi has the sense to understand that Mao was a pariah by the time he died. And so that’s his role model who killed 60 million people through starvation and other things. So this is a problem. We have a guy in the office in China whose role model killed 60 million people directly.

AM: Yes, I understand that, Tony. The problem is the difference is that the CCP has wealthy families now that have almost equal footing as Xi in terms of power, and they can of them if they wanted to. 

TN: Well, and that’s the reality, right? And that’s what nobody talks about. And that may be the backstop for a lot of this stuff.

CB: I’ll tell you this. The rumor mill among Chinese ex-pats, dissidents, et cetera, et cetera, are in hyperdrive this year. Look, it’s hard to know what to believe. It’s very hard to know what to believe. Okay? So I’m not about to push any theories, but there’s a lot of that discussion going around.

TN: Guys, this has been great. Thank you so much for doing this on such short notice. For anyone watching, please put comments below. We’ll take a look at them and we’ll watch them through the next week. If you have any additional thoughts, please let us know, and look forward to seeing how the next thanks a lot.

Categories
Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 02 May 2022

Subscribe to CI Futures special promo here: https://www.completeintel.com/promo Only until April 30th.

Sam Rines wrote a piece on business costs and uncertainty weighing on earnings this season. He talked us through what’s happening with interesting charts on Caterpillar and Old Dominion.

We saw Facebook turn dramatically this week and we saw KWEB up over 7% on Friday. At the same time, Amazon, Pinterest, and others with disappointing earnings. Tech isn’t really a sector-wide play as it was in 2020 and 2021. Alber Marko explains what should we be looking at in tech.

We’ve had a lot of action in Europe with Russia cutting off the gas in Poland and Bulgaria and a demand that oil and gas be paid in Rubles. Tracy Shuchart explains what it means for commodity prices and the market in general.

Key themes from last week

  1. Earnings: COGS in the Machine
  2. Earnings: Tech
  3. Europe-Gas-Ruble Chaos

This is the 16th episode of The Week Ahead in collaboration with Complete Intelligence and 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:

Transcript

TN: Hi everyone. This is The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. We’re joined today by Tracy Shuchart, Sam Rines, and Albert Marko. Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to like and subscribe. Also, please note this is the last weekend for our CI future promo. $50 a month for thousands of assets reforecast weekly. So please go to completeintol.com/promo. Subscribe for $50 a month and you will get global market and economic information. Thanks for that.

So, guys, this week is a little bit exciting. We have a few key themes that we’re looking at this week. Two of them are earnings-related. One is COGS in the machine, which is related to a newsletter that Sam Rines put out today. The other one is tech. And the last thing we’re looking at is the Europe-Gas-Ruble chaos.

So, Sam, you wrote a piece today on business costs and uncertainty weighing on earnings. So can you walk us through this? We’ve got a couple of slides from your newsletter up. One is Caterpillar Earnings. Maybe you could walk us through that first and then we’ll go to the Old Dominion earnings and walk through why those are so important.

SR: I think it’s really interesting to kind of at least be able to get some real-world understanding of what’s happening on the ground. Right. We all know wages are going up. We know costs are going up. We know shipping costs are going up. But how that was going to be reflected through the earnings season was somewhat of an unknown. Right. We knew it was going to affect us, but we didn’t know to what extent.

The interesting part about Caterpillar and one of the reasons I like to point it out is that they had pricing power. They pushed prices pretty heavily down the system. The problem for them was that they couldn’t push the price as much as their materials and shipping costs went up. It was simply too big of a headwind, at least for the first quarter. Their orders are fine. The business itself is okay. But generally what we saw was pricing power. Not… There were a few, but pricing power was generally unable to keep up with the cost pressures overall.

The interesting one and kind of related to Caterpillar are Polaris. Polaris is one of the most interesting companies. It’s consumer-facing yet, it’s a manufacturer. It’s something you don’t need a new side by side typically. You don’t need it. Right. These aren’t needs. These are more of discretionary spending. They had a very similar problem to Caterpillar. But the end market user for these is very similar to Harley Davidson. There was another one that had issues.

The inventories are extraordinarily low. Right. Their inventory levels at dealerships are very low. So eventually when they can pick up their production, they’re going to be able to push up their production numbers pretty significantly just to be able to refill the inventory pipeline at their dealership. So while it’s a big headwind today, it’s worth watching call it nine to 18 months down the road when you begin to see signs of these material costs abating, the supply chains getting back to normal.

Those companies are going to be able to put up some pretty interesting numbers very quickly.

TN: So, Sam, will they leak in gradual price rises? Because it doesn’t sound like they’ve been able to do it all at once. But will they continue to raise prices even as, say, the primary factors of inflation start to abate a little bit?

SR: Oh, yes. That’s been a constant theme of this earnings season has been. We will continue to either try to find ways to squeeze costs out of the supply chain, and normalize those somewhat, but almost more emphasized was there will be price increases to offset all of this.

To your point on Old Dominion, they just tossed on fuel surcharges.

TN: Yeah.

SR: If you’re going to have problems with freight, fine. But we’re going to surcharge you on fuel. And they only pushed about 50% of their overall gain. And year over year was pure surcharge. So it was an interesting one.

TN: And fuel charges are sticky, right. They don’t take those off right when fuel prices go down, they keep those for a year after the prices go down, right?

SR: Correct. Right. It’s the interesting part about all of this is these price increases are not going to be reversed. Caterpillar is not going to take off their price increases. Polaris probably isn’t going to take off some of their price increases, Old Dominion is unlikely in the near term. These are going to be fairly sticky over time.

TN: Okay. So last week when both you and Tracy weren’t here and Albert and I did the heavy lifting to keep the show going, we talked about sticky prices and we talked about how we hit new pricing levels. Even if the rate of inflation slows down, we’ve hit new pricing levels. Is that semi-permanent? Is that permanent or is that transitory?

SR: It’s a step function, right. Okay. You step up and then you’re not going to step back down. You step up the price increases and then maybe you can trickle two or 3% inflation on top of that going forward. But step-functions do not reverse. And I would say that this is much more of a step function type deal.

TN: Okay, good news, Tracy. You were going to add?

TS: I was just going to add I mean, the business survey. The Fed business survey came out small business survey came out this week and they were looking at it in four out of ten small businesses said they were looking at price increases of 10% or more. So this is across the board, not just for mega-cap companies.

TN: Right. Yeah. And even since I talk about coffee so much, even one of the small coffee roasters who I know, said his costs had risen 50% over the last year and he was only able to put in a 20 to 25% price rise. But I’m certain that he’s going to continue to gradually work price rises over the next year or two as we’ve hit this kind of plateau, or at least step function in price rises. So good news all around. Right.

So as we stay on COG, Sam, you had a portion in your newsletter talking about Meta, and we’ve got that on-screen talking about their G&A increase. Can you talk us through that?

SR: Yeah. So I thought it was pretty interesting. They increased their employee base by 28% year over year. I mean, this whole idea is that hiring is tough. It wasn’t for Meta. But the funny part is, or not funny. But G&A was up 45, so you hired 28% more people, but G&A popped 45. Again, that’s a step up that probably isn’t going to step down any time soon unless they’re going to begin laying people off. Right. Maybe it’ll roll out of earnings next year, but it’s not going well.

TN: We’ve seen some tech layoffs, right.

SR: Some.

TN: Announced over the past week. It’s not like it’s not a huge trend yet, but we’ve seen a few.

SR: Yeah. And the other important part that I think was overlooked was Snapchat, Facebook, or Meta, whatever you want to call it, when they announced earnings, they cited that, listen, when you have inflationary pressures, wage pressures and you’re a small business, guess where the discretionary spend is, that’s marketing budgets.

Marketing budgets will get cut and get cut fairly dramatically and fairly quickly if you continue to have this. And not to mention if you don’t have the stuff to sell and you continue to have supply chain issues, it doesn’t make a whole lot of sense to spend a lot of money on marketing. So I think those two raised some red flags, I think we’re subtly overlooked by a lot of people sitting on.

TN: We talked about this last week and how a lot of ad inventories are likely to come online soon. So there’s a supply problem and a demand problem with those companies going forward. I think the names that come to mind will probably do fine. The smaller names are probably going to suffer. So it might be tough.

Albert, on that, we saw Facebook turned dramatically this week in the last half of the week after they reported earnings. KWEB was up 7% today, a stock that we talked about here a few weeks ago. But at the same time, Amazon, Pinterest, and others are disappointed. So tech was a sector-wide play in ’20 and ’21. It’s not that anymore, is it?

AM: Yes and no. The problem with tech is that there are about a dozen names that the Fed uses to pump the market. So forget about Pinterest. That’s too small of a company. We’re looking at Google, Facebook, Meta, whatever you want to call it. Not so much Amazon, but the other ones like AMD and whatnot? So they’re going to yoyo those earnings in those pumps. So what they’ll do is they’ll wait until Netflix…

They know that Netflix will miss and they’ll pump the market to soften the blow and then they know that Apple is going to beat so they’ll let the market sell-off and use that to drive up the market. So this is just a cat and mouse game by the Fed to just manipulate the markets until what they’ve been saying is a soft landing.

The tech earnings are just playing right into that narrative of theirs. They know what the earnings are beforehand and they just play the market like that. So going on with tech earnings? Yeah, I mean they are weak. We can see that they are incredibly weak.

Will they be weak for the whole year? I don’t know. They do like the Nasdaq. So I wouldn’t want to be short tech going into the summer. But that’s just my personal opinion. But then you see KWEB surge because the Chinese start talking…

TN: Ion subsidies. Right. And government activity.

AM: It is what it is and you never know what type of government contracts Meta, Google, or whatnot will start popping into their bookkeeping. It’s a really dangerous game to short tech in my opinion.

TN: Yeah, well it’s interesting to me to see the user’s numbers like aint Netflix and I know there’s a couple of weeks old now but Netflix goes down. Pinterest goes down, Snapchat. These sorts of things. Amazon was kind of tepid but Facebook was really good. So I think we’re seeing almost some elasticity in some of these markets as we see people going back to work and we see other things happening. We’re finding out who’s going to be there no matter what and whose demand is a little bit flexible.

AM: Yeah. And then you’ll also find that some of these tech companies will look to acquisitions to boost their user numbers going into the fall. So this is why I don’t like the short tech at this level.

TN: By the way, if anybody is looking for a tech acquisition. Right here.

AM: Yeah, cool. 46 billion. Cool 46 billion will do it.

TN: Okay. Let’s move on to commodities. Tracy, there have been a lot of issues in Europe with the ruble as we’ve seen more countries decide to pay for oil and gas in rubles. We’ve seen some interesting action with the Euro and the ruble and with gas prices. Can you talk us through what’s going on there? And really, what does it mean? Because we’ve seen the price action. But what do you see its kind of meaning going forward?

TS: I mean what it means is Europe’s not directly paying in rubles. Right. What they’re going to do is they’re going to set up an account at Gasprom Bank. They will continue to pay in Euros, dollars, and local currency. In turn, Gasprom Bank will convert that currency into a separate account. So it’s not technically against sanctions. It’s a workaround. Right.

The interesting thing is EU didn’t have a choice, to be quite honest. They’re dependent on Russia for 67% of their natural gas. They don’t have LNG storage facilities built out. Those are going to take at least two to four years. I don’t care what they say next year, it’s not going to happen. Those things take a very long time.

So right now, they’re kind of being held hostage by Russians. So they’re going to have to pay as much as they don’t want to. Now they can wean themselves off of Russian oil a lot quicker because you can have the Middle East pick up that slack and they don’t import all that much. Right. It depends on the country. But Europe is not a huge source of oil exports for Russia. So that can happen.

And so for what I foresee, they’ll probably do that just so that they say we’re getting rid of Russian energy. Right. So I think you’ll see Russian oil cuts, I think that can be done relatively quickly. But as far as nat gas, I think it’s going to take a lot longer than most think. Even though they said they wanted two-thirds off by the end of 2022 and then completely out of Russian gas by 2027.

Again, I think that’s going to take a lot longer than they anticipate.

TN: Yeah. Can you imagine the conversion fees that Russian banks are charging for Euro to ruble? We’ll never know. Right.

TS: Banks are going to make money. It’s good for Russia. Right. That keeps the currency stable and it keeps their economy stable. And so, I mean, it’s kind of a win for Russia on this because the banks are winning and their currency and economy are winning on this one.

TN: Yeah. So we also had an emergency kind of this week with Russia saying they would turn off gas to Poland. And they did. But Poland has taken other measures since the war started to get other sources of gas. So it didn’t hurt them all that much, did it?

TS: Yeah, no, not at all. I mean, it was Poland and Bulgaria. They’re very adamant from the beginning to get out of Russian gas. They also don’t rely on it as much as, say, Germany does. Poland already built out an LG storage facility tank that’s completed.

They also produce a lot of coal and they use a lot of coal. And so that was not a surprise to me, nor did it hurt those countries very much.

TN: Right. What country do you think is in the most difficult position right now? Is it Germany?

TS: Germany hands down. A lot of the reasons are because they don’t have any other pipelines into Germany except Russia. So they’re definitely in the weakest position right now.

TN: Okay. So, guys, what do we expect, like, with the ruble going forward? It’s hit its pre-war levels. Do we expect the ruble to strengthen?

TS: Right now, yes, I think that it probably will continue to strengthen just because they’re asking for payments of commodities in the ruble.

TN: They’re not asking.

TS: Well, yes, they’re holding hostage. But it’s not just in other words, it’s not just the energy complex. It’s metals, agriculture, et cetera. So I think that we’ll probably see that continue to strengthen.

TN: Okay. Hey, I also wanted to ask you about fertilizer. I saw some of the Fertilizer stocks come off a bit this week. I know that we’ve talked about fertilizer before. Is it still as urgent of an issue as it was, say, three weeks ago? And if it is, why are Fertilizer stocks coming, falling this week?

TS: Well, I think partially because we saw kind of natural gas pullback a bit. Right. That kind of alleviated the pressure. We also saw the broader market sell-off, which means sell what you have to if you get a margin call. Right. And you had something like IPI, whose earnings were not as good as they could have been. Right. Considering. So it’s kind of a combination of everything.

SR: Yeah. And you are beginning to see signs of demand destruction as well. There was an announcement by a Brazilian farming giant that they were going to cut their fertilizer usage by 25 or more percent this year. So, yeah. Yields down, fertilizer up.

AM: Not to mention the good old dollar looking like it’s going to go to 110 on the Dixie causing problem everywhere.

TN: What do you think about that, Albert? What’s the time horizon for 110?

AM: I think we get that within the next two months. Yellen is on a mission to destroy emerging markets. She’s going to do with the dollar. She did this in 2013 when she was Fed chair. So, I mean, it’s the same playbook. It’s nothing new.

TN: So if the dollar does hit 110, does it stay there for some time, or is it just kind of marking territory, saying, we can do this again if you don’t behave?

AM: I think it’s a moment in time. Keeping the dollar at 110 is going to cause really big problems across the world. So they can’t keep it there too long. But they can… Even China talking about the stimulus, 109 causes a problem for China. It’s quite an event to see that happen.

SR: Yeah. Into Albert’s point, and I think this is incredibly important, china has to buy food. Right. And they’re buying, you’ve seen the rip lower on RMB, CNY, that thing has gotten crushed over the last week. And they’re still buying corn and soybeans from the US en masse. And that’s getting much more expensive very quickly. That’s going to be a problem.

TS: The only thing that’s helping them right now is that their entire country is locked down. Right. I mean, that’s the only thing that’s helping slow the blow and kind of making these commodities pull back a bit so they’re not as expensive.

TN: But Xi has got to make some money to feed his people. Right. Otherwise, you’re going to have Mao 1961 all over again.

TS: What he’s doing is insane. Don’t starve your people. So obviously ulterior motives are going on there.

TN: Yeah. So we’ll talk more about China next week. Okay, good. Let’s have a week ahead lightning round, guys. What are you looking at? Kind of most Interestingly for the week ahead? Sam, if you can go first, what’s at the top of your mind right now for the week ahead?

SR: Top of my mind is going to be energy company earnings and what they’re saying about their production, whether they’re upping premium, where they’re getting production from, how they’re doing it if they’re doing it, whether or not Capex budgets are moving higher, how they’re moving higher and where. And then any comments on labor pipe concrete, et cetera, I think will be very interesting as we go through next week.

TN: I think you stole Tracy’s answer, though, right?

TS: Exactly what I’m looking at. I expect to look at production probably has not increased that much because I think they’re having labor issues and supply chain issues have not gotten any better, if not ten times worse. So that’s what I’m looking forward to.

Also always keep an eye on China. Beijing is just locked down or partially locked down. So how many more cities are we going to have, how many more States we’re going to have, and how many more people are going to be locked down for how long? Because that’s going to affect the commodities market in the midterm. But that said, if you look at the commodities complex, we’re still over 100, like 104.

So it’s still holding strong, even though we’ve had a lot of demand. They say about a million and a half barrels per day of China demand is kind of off the market right now.

TN: Yes. So if they come back online, it’s game on, right?

TS: Yes.

TN: All right. And Albert, what are you looking at for the weekend?

AM: Probably the most dovish sounding 50 basis point rate hike you’ll ever hear from the Fed. Like we did this and we’re sorry. If they want to break this market down sub 4000, go ahead and try to talk hawkish but I don’t think they want to do that. So Jerome will just put his foot in his mouth like usual and say something stupid but it’ll be dovish that’s what I’m watching.

TN: Sam, Fed guy? What do you think, Sam?

SR: I think the same. Listen, I think they’re going to try to avoid talking too much about another 50 basis points hike. They’re going to try to get away from providing clear forward guidance and be incredibly vague because if they’re vague about what they’re going to do then it’s going to be perceived as dovish. So agree with Albert, right? You get a 50 basis point hike and then we’re not sure what we’re going to do next, right?

TS: Somebody brought up like 75 basis point hike this week and the Fed was like, no, we’re not even considering that.

TS: Yeah, exciting. Sounds exciting. Okay guys, thank you very much. Have a great weekend. Thank you very much.

AM: Thank you.

TS: You too.

SR: Thanks.

Categories
Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 11 Apr 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

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

Key themes for the Week Ahead

  1. Earnings season expectations
  2. Near-term equity portfolios
  3. 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.

Categories
Week Ahead

The Week Ahead – 21 Mar 2022

This week, we saw a Fed rate rise, crude came back from the stratosphere, and Chinese equities came to life.

As we said last week:

– Sam said “watch the 5 and 7 year” bonds, where we saw serious action.

– Sam also said “grip it and rip it” with equity markets.

– Tracy said that dramatic spikes in crude markets were priced out of the market for now

– Albert called for a volatile week thru the Fed meeting, although we didn’t see the lows he’d expected.

Sam walked us through the Fed decision and what’s happening in the bond markets. He also explained a bit more about his “grip it and rip it” comment and where the leaves us.

LME is talking about banning Russian copper on the exchange. What does that mean for global copper markets, as explained by Tracy? We’re also coming off the nickel scandal at the LME. Are there bigger problems with at the LME – mixing politics with markets?

We saw China equity markets perk up this week. KWEB, the China tech ETF, is up over 40% since Monday. What happened, what is Albert watching and what’s coming for Chinese equity markets?

Listen on Spotify:

https://open.spotify.com/episode/1yFipmQCs7XNHEXwj20bZf?si=5310245ccd1545d1

This is the 11th 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
Albert: https://twitter.com/amlivemon
Tracy: https://twitter.com/chigrl

Transcript

TN: Hi, and welcome to The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. And I’m joined by Albert Marko, Sam Rines, and Tracy Shuchart. Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel.

So this week it’s been a really interesting week. We saw Fed rate rise. We saw commodities, especially crude, come back from the stratosphere and we saw Chinese equities come back to life. So it’s been kind of a really weird week.

Last Friday, Sam said to watch the five- and seven-year bonds where we saw some serious action. He also said rip it and grip it with reference to equity markets. So let’s dig into that a little bit today.

Tracy said the dramatic spikes in crude markets were probably priced out in the week before, which we saw bear out this week. And Albert called for an active week before the Fed. We didn’t see the low he expected, but I think very much in line with the volatility he expected this week.

So, Sam, to get started, can you walk us through the Fed’s decision and what’s happening in bond markets?

SR: Yeah. So I think the Fed’s decision is pretty simple to understand on a number of levels. It’s inflation, inflation, inflation and everything else is secondary. When asked multiple times what would knock them off of the call it the inflation war, they made it very clear there was very little that would knock them off that path. So you had a lot of action on seven-year, five-year and a little bit on 10? Not as much as I would have expected, really. But the basic reaction was the Feds going the Fed’s going very hard, very fast, probably would have done 50 if it weren’t for Ukraine and may do 50 at a coming meeting or two if the war in Ukraine doesn’t begin to really spiral into an employment issue in the US. It does not matter about a growth issue, matters about employment issue. So I think that’s really critical.

The two-year looks really well priced to me in light of that situation, quantitative tightening, whatever. That will happen in May. We know that.

TN: We’re convinced it’s happening in May.

SR: We’re convinced it’s happening in May. Yeah. The rhetoric from the Fed is pretty clear that they’re going to go early and they’re going to go fast on quantitative tightening. None of that is great for the longer end of the curve, starting at five s and ending at 30s.

If you want to kind of think about it in terms of ideal perspective, in terms of pricing, it’s probably pretty good. 5s, 7s, 10s, 30s have all priced a pretty interesting growth to inflation narrative that if you begin to have the growth narrative breakdown, if you begin to have the long term inflation embedded narrative breakdown, because the very fast, very good Fed, that’s going to change, and that’s going to push those yields down, prices up pretty dramatically, pretty quickly.

TN: Fantastic. So when you talk about QT in May, I think I bounced back and forth over the past, say month or two months where people are talking about QT, then they’re talking about the possibility of QE, then we’re talking about QT.

So the QT aspect of it, if that happens, which when you say I fully expect it to happen, the main point there is to take money out of circulation, is that right? What is the main point of QT?

SR: What is the main point of QT? Main point of QT is signaling.

TN: Okay.

SR: In my opinion. QE is a pretty big signal to go ahead and buy everything. QT is a pretty good signal that the Fed is serious, right. It’s a seriousness issue. It’s not as dramatic, I think, as it might be interpreted by the financial media in terms of an actual translation to financial conditions or to equity markets, et cetera.

It does tend to knock down multiples, and it probably adds another 25 to 50 basis points worth of tightening this year. But I wouldn’t say it’s a shredding of cash. It’s a shredding of reserves. So reserves never made it in to the market in terms of real usable high power cash. That’s a big difference.

TN: Okay. So when we look at the environment right now versus what you’re expecting for QT in May, are we in kind of an interim opportunistic equity market right now? Are people just kind of trading until the inevitable comes? What’s happening, especially in US equity markets?

SR: What’s happening in US equity markets? That’s a tougher question to answer than you might think. A lot of short covering. That’s the first thing. Second thing is most of the risk seem to be priced as we exited last week. Right.

If you’re going to price the world for World War Three or some sort of big tail risk, that was the time to do it. And you simply didn’t have any of that come to fruition. You had a hawkish Fed, but you didn’t have a Fed that seemed to want to break something really quickly. And it’s pretty obvious that they’re willing to break something at this point, but they didn’t want to break it with a 50 basis point hike or call it three or 3 or 50 basis point hikes. That is one of the reasons why equity markets get a little bit of relief here.

The other side is that the ten year yield dropped. The ten-year yield dropping took some pressure off the Nasdaq for rate increases or interest rate increases that side of things. So Nasdaq outperformed S&P, that’s a pretty important signal. There was some risk on this week.

TN: Great. Okay, Albert, what’s your rate on US equity markets in light of what Sam is talking about with Fed action?

AM: Sam’s right. They want to break something, but they don’t want to be seen as breaking something. I mean, I was dead wrong on the sub 4,000. I completely forgot that Opex was this week. They were not going to pay out $4 trillion and put up just the people. It was just that they probably spent 100 to 150 billion this week to pump this market up and keep it stable up in the stratosphere up here.

I guarantee they spent about at least $100 billion doing that this week. And they just annihilated people. They kept equities up. They are signaling that they’re going to hit inflation hard and fast, just like Sam said. They have to because things are just getting silly at this point.

TN: Okay. And Tracy, in light of what Sam is talking about with QT and more hikes later in the year, do you expect that to have a material impact on commodities over the short to medium term, or do you think they’re still on this strong trajectory that you’ve expected?

TS: Yeah. I think that unfortunately, the Fed cannot subside this with rate hikes because we have, again, real supply demand issues. And so I think the commodities markets, the trajectory is going to continue higher. It doesn’t matter, especially when we’re looking at now we have this Ukraine Russia war, and now we also have 50 million people locked down in China again. And they just closed one of their major ports and manufacturing hubs this week. So supply chains that were sort of beginning to mend, right, after 2020 just got thrown into an entire tail spin once again.

TN: I have a friend in the manufacturing sector who because of the Shenzhen Port close and city close, he got several force majeure letters this week. So that stuff is cascading through industry. We’re not necessarily seeing it in markets yet, but it’s really cascading through industry really quickly. And I think we’re going to start to see that appear in financial statements of companies in the coming months.

AM: That’s important, Tony, because my contention has always been that they’re allowing inflation to run wild because it reduces the amount of rate hikes they actually have to do come May, they might be done with their last rate hikes at that point and start QT just simply on the basis that the supply chains and the economy is struggling.

TN: Right. One thing I want to go back to, Tracy, when you say bullish market and this is my understanding of your statements, but you’re bullish on commodities, you’re not talking about crude going to $140 again next week. This is a medium term play. Is that fair to say?

TS: It’s a medium to longer term play, which I’ve kind of always stated, granted, we had the Russian Ukraine factor come in that push prices to 130 WTI, which was a lot faster than I anticipated. I really liked the fact that we pulled back from that, got some of that geopolitical risk air out of the market, but we’re still on the same trajectory of $150 a barrel over the course of the next year or two.

TN: Right. Okay. Now, while we’re on Russia Ukraine, the LME came out with some news about copper this week and we’re showing that on the screen right now talking about the LME potentially banning Russian copper on the exchange. Can you talk us through that? And what does that mean for global copper markets?

TS: All right, so this is, the LME Commission basically suggested that they ban Russian oil. This has to be presented to the internet. Copper. You said Russian oil.

TN: You meant copper, right?

TS: Copper, yes. Sorry. This has to be presented to the international community for this to actually go through. The problem here is Russia is the 7th largest producer of copper. They account for about 4% of global production. It’s a role on the LME exchange is more significant because they are the third largest exporter of refined copper metal and this is deliverable to the exchange. So this really would send LME markets into chaos. Literally.

TN: Okay, so let’s kind of somehow link that to the LME nickel issues that we saw last week. Okay? Could this, as an exchange, could actions like this impact the credibility of the LME or what does this mean kind of political actions and by “political actions”, I mean there was intervention on behalf of a Chinese entity for the nickel market last week.

There’s potential intervention as a result of geopolitical issues with Russia in the coming weeks. So will we see exchanges get more political and will that impact impact their credibility as an exchange?

TS: Well, that’s the problem, yes. And I do think that it will impact their credibility. The nickel market is essentially broken at the LME rights now, right. They reopened again on Tuesday. They set daily limits at 5%, limit down. They were limited down right away. They raised it to 8% on Thursday, limit down right away, 12% on Friday, limit down right away.

And basically, that’s not because of the fundamentals of the market. That’s because people are running for the hill. They just want out of that contract. Right. And so that is definitely going to be a problem for the LME market going forward.

TN: Are there dangers and we don’t necessarily need to name other markets, but are there dangers of other we’ll say developed market exchanges to kind of make these types? Could we see CBOT or CME or some of these guys start to play these games, too?

TS: I think that’s a difficult question to answer. I do not think that you will see CME do that unless you have some other foreign markets do that first.

TN: Unless a big Chinese state owned entity lose a lot of money.

TS: If we see SHFE do something like that, then I think the United States will. But I do not think you’ll see the CME market actually.

TN: Okay. Yeah. I mean, I’m not sure that some people understand that these exchanges are actually businesses and they have to make business decisions. Right. And some of these business decisions, they’re not completely neutral market participants. Right. In some cases, they get involved in these trades.

TS: They’re there to make money. Right.

TN: They are there to make money. But when politics inserts itself into markets, these exchanges that people think are kind of arms length to the trades, it starts some people wondering about the price. Are they actually getting the right price? Is there really a true market there?

TS: Well, exactly. And that’s exactly what we’re seeing at the LME right now. At the command, so far, we have not seen that at CME yet. But that is to be determined.

TN: Right. Albert, Sam, what do you guys have to say on this?

AM: From my perspective, I can’t really add much to what Tracy said. She’s right on the ball. When it comes to systemic issues, politics gets in the way and protects it. That’s just the way it works. And unfortunately, just seeing what you’re seeing today, which is undermining, it undermines the trust in the entire market overall.

TN: Yeah. It just seems like a problem that’s really hard to get over. Right. Like how long will it be broken and when it’s back, will it snap back? I just don’t know. Sam, do you have any thoughts on this?

SR: My only thought is very similar to Albert’s, in terms of I don’t think anybody’s going to actually trust the LME anytime soon. If you’re going to make a significant trade in a metal, I highly doubt you’re going to want to do it through the LME without having some sort of backup to that position.

TN: Okay, great. Let’s move on to Chinese equities. Albert, we saw China equity markets forgot this week, KWEB, for example, which is a China tech ETF, is up over 40% since Monday. So what happened and what are you watching?

AM: Again, the systemic issues that China is facing in the market, I mean, Hong Kong was about 5% away from just absolutely imploding. They had a new problem where it wasn’t just the foreign money that was leaving the system, but actually the mainland mainland Chinese investors were taking money out, which was something new. And it was to the point where the peg might have even broken. So they had to shore it up by liquidity injections. And the Xi had come out and made those comments citing Hong Kong twice. But I was on Twitter and I was saying, this just can’t happen.

China is completely about to fail market wise. So let’s start picking things, pick the best ETF, pick the best companies out of China. And I mentioned KWEB with you guys, GDS, Chindata, you can throw a dart and pick your Chinese name last week and it went up 40% to 80% at some point.

Same thing. Now I’m kind of trimming my position back, but Chinese housing is at that point right now, where the housing sector accounts for 75% of China’s wealth. They can’t just simply let it deteriorate into nothing where the banks are taking it over. That can’t happen. I mean, Xi would be out in his ass. Sorry about the commentary, but Xi would be out within months if that happens. So I’m going to pick top three Chinese housing names and go for it.

TN: It’s a brave call. It’s a really brave call.

AM: All right.

TN: Do you think there’s room to run with some of these Chinese tech companies or even the broader China market, or do you think the opportunity is really limited to real estate?

AM: Well, no, they can run. The problem that we have now is the Biden administration is starting to target China, assisting Russia and whatnot. So then now you have the geopolitical risks come into the equation and you see these things surge 40% one day, you can easily see a 20% retracement the next day or even more. So that’s why I’m just trimming you take your 60% and be happy with it.

TN: Right. So we talked about Chinese fiscal stimulus, Chinese monetary stimulus. We talked about devaluation. Do the events of the last week move up the time clock for the economic planners in China to get this stuff out the door?

AM: Absolutely. I think they have to even in conjunction with the US, because the US has no fiscal coming so the Chinese have to step up to simulate the economy. Otherwise the entire globe is going into a depression. It’s as simple as that.

TN: Yeah. It’s really. I remember over the past ten years, all the talk about coordinated economic stimulus and all this other stuff since 2008, 2009. And right now we’ve got the Fed pulling back and we’ve got China aggressively moving forward. It’s just a little bit strange. Sam, I guess from a macro perspective, can that work?

SR: It can work depending on how much stimulus is actually put into the system and how it is put into the system. The how is very important in terms of how impactful it will be. Not just domestically for China. But also how impactful it will be beyond their borders.

And what you’d be really concerned about from a macro perspective is how far beyond the borders does that stimulus actually get? That’s where I get interested in it, because if it does begin to move beyond the borders, it’s very positive for Europe. That’s very positive for some US companies. But you have to have a stimulus that isn’t just a transfer to businesses.

You have to have it actually hit the Chinese consumer and hit the Chinese consumer quickly.

TN: Okay. So we’re not just talking about a couple of RRR cuts, which is what they do all the time. It’s kind of the go to. This is the reserve requirement, right?

SR: Yeah. I don’t care if they do RRR cut.

TN: I don’t think many people do, although I think they kind of have to phone that in to show that they’re doing something. I would think it’s more aggressive on the fiscal side, on the TSF, the total social finance side, where they just need to churn the cash out to SMEs, SOEs, big multinational companies, that sort of thing to almost get them to the point where they’re exporting deflation again, of manufactured goods. Does that make sense as an approach, Sam?

SR: I mean, it makes a lot of sense as an approach, but at the same time, you’re locking down due to your COVID zero process or policy. So that process would be really interesting and intriguing. But it’s a question of whether or not it would be effective given the health policy on the other side. So, yes, it would be great, but it would be probably great in three to six months.

TN: Okay, so guys, this is a great point. The COVID zero policy, it feels like much of the rest of the world has come out of this. Right. And China has gone back into lockdowns. Do you think there’s a point at which other markets have an uncomfortable call with China and go, guys, you got to open up because you’re killing the rest of us.

SR: I think they had it. I think they had it. If you look at the way they’re handling the current lockdown, they’re busting people to factories.

There’s a closed loop factory policy. While you have a COVID zero policy and “these places are locked down,” they are busing people to the factories. So I think there’s been a little bit of a let’s move on here.

TN: Okay.

AM: And also want to point out is these lockdowns came suspiciously close to the talks with the US, both with Biden and our glorious blink or Sullivan, the genius Sullivan that we have. But I think it might have been a little bit of a negotiation tactics like if you decide to play hardball with us over Russia, we can just shut down and ding our economy. So I think there was a little bit of that also sprinkle in there, right. A little bit of real politics.

TN: Yeah. Okay, guys. So as we come out of this weird week, what do you expect for the week ahead? Tracy, what are you looking at for the week ahead?

TS: So I think in the commodity markets, we’re still at that point where we’re kind of coming down after that initial knee jerk reaction to Russia, Ukraine. So I expect a little bit of consolidation across markets. Depending. It’s kind of what we’re seeing. So I think the market still be volatile, but like less volatile. I think we’re kind of like at that ripple point where the ripples really big and then we kind of get smaller and smaller.

TN: I think you’re Right. I think the consolidation makes sense. Albert, what are you looking For? It seems to me on the geopolitical side, we’re almost going through almost a geopolitical consolidation a little bit. We’ve had so much drama over the past few weeks, but I almost feel like it’s coming down a bit.

AM: It has been coming down and that’s one of the reasons they’re able to sit there and pump the market so high. I think it was overbought, to be honest with you. I think this market even considering going back to 4500, you’re just going to have every fund out there shorting the heck out of it. So I would see them try to test 4470, 4480, 4490, maybe 4500, but after that, it’s probably downside from there.

TN: Okay. Great. Sam, what are you looking at?

SR: I’m looking at the five-year I think it’s a pretty interesting place to be and I think it’s going to be highly volatile. But that’s the one to watch with inflation and growth expectations beginning to be a little wobbly.

TN: Great. Guys, thanks so much. I really appreciate it. Have a great week ahead.

AM, SR, TS: Thanks.