Complete Intelligence

Categories
Podcasts

Forecasting Global Markets with Artificial Intelligence

“Bitcoin Kid” JP Baric is joined by Tony Nash in this premier episode of Digital Gold.

 

Tony Nash is the CEO and Founder of Complete Intelligence. Using advanced AI, Complete Intelligence provides highly accurate market, cost, and revenue forecasts fueled by billions of enterprise and public data points. Previously, Tony built and led the global research business for The Economist in the Asia consulting business for IHS he’s also been a social entrepreneur, media entrepreneur, writer, and consultant.

 

JB: Tony, as I mentioned, you’re the founder of Complete Intelligence. Can you tell me a little bit more about what Complete Intelligence does and how you work with your clients?

 

TN: Sure, yeah. As you mentioned in the intro, I led global research for a British firm called The Economist and I led Asia consulting for an American firm called IHS Markit. In that time, over about a decade, I had a bunch of clients come to me saying, we have two problems. First, forecasts are terrible and that was a comment both on the work of the firms that I worked with as well as just the market generally and they said forecast error rates are terrible. There’s no accountability of the forecasting saas and nobody tracks their historical data, so we have to try to dig it out ourselves.

 

So forecast accuracy is a huge issue. The second issue is the appropriateness of a forecast. So if you make a chemical or a mobile phone or cake mix, there are specific items within that product that you need to know the cost of. But you may not be able to do that internally. Major companies have hundreds of Excel workbooks floating around with their forecast for sales or for costs or whatever and it’s just really confusing. So what ends up happening is people kind of manually estimate costs and revenues. And so, what we wanted to do was automate that entire process company-wide.

 

We wanted to take out the human bias that comes with the forecasting industry and internal forecasts and all that stuff and we really wanted to build products that allowed the machines to learn how markets move so that’s currencies commodities equities and so on as well as how company revenue and spend changes over time.

 

JB: So when doing some of my initial research on Complete Intelligence, basically just to paraphrase, you guys are taking the spot of what an analyst would do. Is that correct?

 

TN: Yeah. But here’s what we don’t do. We don’t put together a report on what’s going to happen in industry x or with commodity y because what we find is when that stuff is put together so when an analyst puts a report together on some aspect of an industry, it’s really loaded with a lot of, let’s say, a house view on something or a personal bias. And so we do have a weekly newsletter and we do kind of video podcast that sort of thing. But we don’t have industry notes because we don’t want our clients to feel like we have bias towards say the oil and gas sector or toward industrial metals or that we’re for or against gold or for or against crypto or something.

 

There’s so much of that loaded into forecasting today and it has been that way for decades, that we just want to let the data and the sophistication of the data… we’re doing billions and billions of calculations every time we run our process. Humans do this but they’re not aware of it. The humans also aren’t aware of the amount of bias that they put into their calculation. So what we do is we track this and we track it based on error rates and we allow the machines to correct based upon how they’ve made error over time. It’s just like an infant learns, right. You touch a hot stove and you learn not to do that again. It’s very similar the way we kind of reinforce the behaviors that we want within our platform.

 

JB: I guess my question to you is when it comes to these machines, they’re learning in the background so you don’t have a team of a thousand analysts. Instead you have a team of a thousand neural networks or machines basically working for you running these calculations 24/7 on all these different commodities and are they just making assumptions and then confirming if those assumptions are right and then the models that do better end up going end up kind of getting weighted more? How does that work, I guess? How do those questions and answers work in those data testing points, those AB testing that you mentioned.

 

TN: It’s a good question. So we’re running tens of thousands of scenarios for everything we forecast, every time we forecast. And then we’re looking at which ones best reflect the market as it stands right now and then we add in the different approaches on a weighted basis to make sure that they reflect where the market is. So it’s a multi-layer analysis. It’s not just a basic kind of regression correlations driver, that sort of thing. We’re also looking at the methodologies themselves.

 

Some of these are very fundamental, traditional statistical methodologies. Some of them are more technically-driven say decision trees, those sorts of things, types of machine learning models and we’re looking at how on a proportional basis those different methodologies best understand the market at this point in time. And so yes. I mean, that’s a long way of saying “yes” to your question.

 

JB: No. I think that was a great answer. So you guys are looking at currencies, equities, and in July you discussed gold and silver being nature’s Bitcoin. Can you explain to our listeners what you mean by that and provide your thoughts on bitcoin as a store of value and where you see that blockchain space going?

 

TN: Well I think one of the key aspects of cryptocurrencies is that there should be a fixed amount of it. If it really is immutable, then there’s only so much of it and if there really is demand for something that’s limited, then the value should rise or fall based upon the availability of that fixed good, right?

 

Gold is similar in that I can’t necessarily go and buy a car with gold. I mean I’m sure I could. I can’t buy a loaf of bread with gold. I think cryptocurrencies is becoming a bit more spendable than precious metals, a bit more useful depending on which cryptocurrency you’re looking at. But yeah, it is similar in that cryptocurrencies to date have been more of an asset than a currency. They’ve behaved more like an asset than a currency.

 

Meaning the value goes up and down pretty dramatically based upon the perception of scarcity. Currencies don’t necessarily act that way. Currencies act as units of value so that you can buy other stuff. And so, it is. Gold is on some level kind of nature’s bitcoin or nature’s cryptocurrency. But I think we’re coming to a point where there’s a division between those two, where cryptocurrencies are starting to be used as and when II say starting of course they have already been, but more broadly be used as vehicles to buy other stuff not just stores of value. So the former is a currency the latter is an asset.

 

JB: Yeah. I definitely agree with you on that point as we move down this line of utilization. We saw with the Paypal news that recently came out Square News. Hopefully people will start using bitcoin more as a day-to-day currency. It’s one of the biggest I guess questions I get is, you know, it’s too hard to use bitcoin or what am I going to use at the store less of actually bitcoin has a store of value especially from some of the retail clients coming into this space.

So regarding bitcoin and Complete Intelligence, are you guys forecasting anything in the digital currency space? Are you forecasting the currencies themselves maybe the mining profitability or any of the mining machines and can you speak a little bit further on that?

 

TN: We do. We started forecasting limited cryptos about six months ago and as I’m sure you can imagine there’s been a lot of volatility in cryptocurrencies over the last couple years. And because we’re a machine learning platform, it takes a while for the machines to understand how cryptocurrencies trade and move and so just because we started forecasting cryptocurrencies doesn’t necessarily mean that we would recommend people making trades or taking positions based upon what we forecast. You know, it’s different for things like, I don’t know, copper or whatever that we’ve been doing for a long time and those are also relatively stable markets say industrial metals, you know, that sort of thing. But cryptocurrencies very volatile, very new, and the market is still learning how to value them.

 

This is one of the key things about cryptocurrencies that I think is misunderstood is the market is still learning how to value them. That’s not a comment on whether I think they’re undervalued or overvalued right now. I just think the market isn’t really sure how to value them. And so, you know, in our platform we expect it to take really another couple months before we’re confident in where our platform is saying cryptocurrencies will go again because it’s such a complicated asset in the way it moves and because there’s so little institutional and historical knowledge about it. We have to iterate it, you know, a couple billion more times for us to really understand where it’s going.

 

JB: Are you seeing a lack of data or trading data, network data in making these decisions that making it harder than traditional markets or have you seen that the data in the bitcoin space is relatively open and well established?

 

TN: I don’t really see an issue with data. I think part of the problem with cryptocurrencies is that it doesn’t really trade on fundamentals. So what we’re utilizing is a configuration of methodologies that balance out fundamentals and technicals. You know, some months, certain assets lean more toward technicals. Some months, they lean more toward fundamentals.

 

Cryptocurrencies don’t really have fundamentals to lean on and so then you’re looking at a lot of relatively short-term and ultra-short-term approaches to understand the value of something. So the memory of the price, it’s either sticky or it’s not and I know that sounds a little bit silly but you know cryptocurrencies move in bursts or they languish. There’s really not a lot of in between and so understanding which technical approaches to take and within what configurations to take them is what’s really kind of confounding our platform right now and I would say our error rates for cryptocurrency is probably I think three times what our average error rate is.

 

So our average error rates for across our assets on an absolute percentage basis is between five and seven percent something like that. Across currencies, commodities, equities. For cryptos, we’re looking at probably a 15 ish to 20 percent error and so it might be a little bit lower than that now. But it’s settling within the range that we’re comfortable with. We’re really comfortable when things are say less than 10 percent error and we expect to be there, you know, very soon. But part of what’s different about what we’re doing is that we’re not afraid to talk about our error rates. We’ll be very transparent with people about what our current and historical error rates are and have been because our clients are making decisions based upon the data that we bring to them and the forecast that we bring to them.

 

So when I say to you, look our, you know, our error rates for cryptocurrencies is between 15 and 20 percent, I’m not really sure you can find many other people who would admit that publicly. But if traders are making decisions based upon the forecasts that we bring to market, then they need to know that, right? They need to know how to hedge against that error range.

 

JB: And so you’re referring to that the cryptocurrencies are much harder to predict. Is that keeping any of your current clients from moving over to the digital currency space? Are they looking at this space for growth opportunities or for potential revenue generating opportunities or even a way to hedge from the current macro environment?

 

TN: I think everyone is either involved and trading let’s say even at a small level or they’re very committed. I think the approach that we’ve tried to take, the number of firms that get very hypey about cryptocurrencies and almost feel like they’re trying to push it on to their clients. We’re not that way. We don’t care if someone invests in iron ore or investing cryptocurrencies. It’s really what is their profile and you know how well can we forecast it. But I think the interest in cryptocurrencies obviously is still very high because nobody really knows what’s happening there.

 

Nobody really knows what the future is there and nobody really wants to miss out. Actually, I know maybe two or three people who want to miss out on that and do and already at all but very few people want to miss out on it and so they’re keeping an eye on it or dipping a toe in if they’re not already in in a big way. And I think you know you have to be fair on these sorts of things you know. It’s not as if say the main cryptocurrencies have have kind of fizzled out. They’re still around. They didn’t fizzle out after say two years. They’re still around. People still trade them. You’re still trying to you know we’re still trying to figure out how to get them into some sort of monetary system or some sort of transmission mechanism. And until that’s figured out, I think that you know unless they fizzle out you know the main ones I think it’s still necessary to stay involved. So we’re not seeing a massive demand for what we’re doing in terms of forecasting and when I say forecasting I’m not talking about the next say five to seven days. I’m talking about the next 12 months, okay. Monthly intervals over the next 12 months.

 

So for something like cryptocurrencies that have a relatively short-term horizon because it has been pretty speculative from an investment perspective. It’s been pretty hard to to look at this stuff over a longer term. But we’re getting better at it and I think as these things become more predictive, there will be a lot more interest and that’s largely the market coming to agreement on what the various cryptocurrencies are actually worth.

 

JB: And following up on that you know, how do you value them this being a common trend it seems like in the analysis that you guys are doing as a large bitcoin miner in this space, we believe the stock to flow ratio is a huge component of giving value to underlying cryptocurrency and so that is when the when you know the having occurs did your models take that into account or did they do they how do they kind of work with that event?
Because I think the having is an event where you don’t really have that in any other industry where you’re losing half of your new coins coming in or half a new supply coming in on a daily basis.

 

TN: Well I think you you know, what you. You do see this a bit with say central bank money supply, you know that sort of thing. So and you do see, let’s say with the Dollar or the Euro, the Japanese Yen or something like that. You do see central bank money supply coming in and the pickup of that money supply is not fundamentally dissimilar from cryptocurrencies. Although I think with cryptocurrencies, it’s a it’s a fair bit more technical. But I think it’s you know understanding both the stock and the flow is critical to understanding where that value is. If there’s too much stock, then, you know, it’s obviously not valuable unless there’s the demand, the flow going into demand.

 

So yeah. I think it’s… But until people can have a normalized discussion around where it’s similar to say central banks, then I think it’s really hard for people to contextualize within their kind of trading and valuation framework. So look. You know, if you look for example, you know, the Chinese government introduced this coin into Shenzhen a few weeks ago, right. They effectively gave people the equivalent of thirty dollars in this Chinese crypto currency to spend and then it was gone. So they’re calling that a study on how widespread adoption of cryptocurrencies will work and I’m sure it was gone within a day, right. I mean if I’m given 30 bucks to spend for free then I’m going to spend it probably today.

 

So you know, I think until we have a better baseline for widespread adoption and I think the government endorsement on some level kind of matters because let’s look at that thirty dollar. It’s effectively like a voucher or a gift card, right, that they’ve given people. They gave people a thirty dollar gift card for free. It doesn’t matter what currency it’s in. Okay. It’s gonna get spent, right. I don’t necessarily think that that’s a valid test of the adoption of a cryptocurrency.

 

I think you have to have something more widespread and more enduring because there you have a fixed amount of stock that’s spent over a very abbreviated period. Doesn’t really mean anything, right. But I think until we have a wider spread adoption for spend, we’re not necessarily going to get a fundamental based value, okay. We’ll get that technically based value, meaning looking at the stocks and the flows and trying to understand based on stocks and flows but not necessarily based on the inherent value that you get with a legit currency. Not that cryptocurrency is illegitimate. That was probably a bad word choice but let’s say a central bank endorsed currency, we’ll say that much.

 

JB: And on the central bank, endorsed currency kind of chain of thought, when you see the United States and Europe and also China adopting these different types of cryptocurrencies or I guess you could say ways to distribute capital to individuals for stimulus. How are you seeing China and the US and any other major players kind of deploying these central bank currencies over the next two or three years? As you did mention, you know China is already doing it. In the US, I’m not aware of us doing any type of central bank currencies or deploying central bank currencies to citizens. But are you seeing… I guess, how do you see that playing out over the next two or three years, if not and maybe longer?

 

TN: Sure. So China, the China central bank did a first test of a cryptocurrency I think in January of 2017.

 

JB: Oh wow.

 

TN: So they’ve been trying to figure this out for some time and I think china sees it as a potential way to rival the US Dollar. The problem is, there is no trust in the the People’s Bank of China. Nobody outside of China really trusts it, okay. So the immutable aspect of a cryptocurrency doesn’t have validity outside of probably the walls of the center of the People’s Bank of China building. And without that, kind of limited supply, without the immutability of it, then again, it’s just a gift card. It’s just a voucher. Now I think the PBOC, the Chinese central bank has had but with each day it’s kind of passing I think they’ve had an opportunity to utilize cryptocurrencies for things like trade finance which is a really opaque aspect of international finance related to trade. And if they had, let’s say gone to some of their trade partners and said look in Europe or the Middle east or somewhere, you know, we can get around using the US Dollar by utilizing this digital, you know, Chinese yen or something.

 

I think there was a time when people would have been open to it especially if it made payments faster and less costly. But I think that window has passed at least for now. I think it’s really hard for China to insert itself. I think if they had done this say in 2015-16, I think they would have had a real opportunity and they could have done a lot to displace some US Dollar denominated trade finance and probably displace a lot of Euro denominated trade finance. But they didn’t do it. They’ll keep trying.

 

I’m not sure how successful they’ll be outside of those places that have to trade with them meaning North Korea, Iran and and those sorts of economies Venezuela and so on. With Europe and the US, I don’t think the central bankers fully understand what a cryptocurrency is and I don’t think that they really have say the patience to understand how to say deploy it in a credible way, if that makes sense. And so, I think you’ll almost have these parallel currency regimes with cryptocurrencies.

 

The problem though is, I don’t necessarily, at least for the next few years, see them displacing a currency like the Dollar. They may displace say secondary or tertiary currencies within say international trade, trade finance, cross-border payments, these sorts of things, and even domestic payments where say a central bank doesn’t really have credibility that makes a lot of sense but I’m not necessarily sure that I see it displacing say US Dollar or Euro transactions let’s say in kind of main say kind of day-to-day activities.

 

If you look at a government like Venezuela or Turkey or something like that where you see a real currency crisis, I think it’s possible. I’m not necessarily saying it’s probable at a place like Turkey but I think it’s possible that you could see adoption of something like cryptocurrency especially if the government puts a a restriction on US Dollar use.

 

JB: Tony, do you see… I mean it seems like you’re saying that the western, you know, China will have its own central bank digital currency and maybe the United States will try to deploy theirs as well. Do you think this is going to move the global economy into being a more closed system or do you think this will actually open up finance and trade and make it you know better for everyone? Or do you think we’ll end up having this almost finance war. We already do have that but like on the digital currency level now where it’s traceable and trackable by a single entity and the capital or the cost to deploy these systems is much lower.

 

TN: It’s a great question. I think the people who accept the digital Chinese Yuan are going to have to decide if they want a centralized authority in China, tracking all of their activities in that digital CNY, you know. I think that’s a real decision and a real trade-off that those people who trade in that currency are going to have to figure out.

 

Although dollars are traceable, you know you can kind of transmit them and other currencies. You can kind of transmit them, I wouldn’t really say in an anonymous way but you can kind of get around tracking of every single transaction. But with cryptocurrencies, you know, the ledger tracks everything. And so if you have say the PBOC in China tracking every single transaction for every single digital CNY, that’s out there.

 

That’s kind of next level of information out there, right it’s not just Google understanding what’s in your email and it’s not just Alexa tracking what you’re saying. It’s every single Penny you put out there being tracked by a central ledger.

 

JB: And I think you said that perfectly you know China will be tracking every transaction and that will help these Central Bank digital currencies. If it’s China, if it’s the U.S. if it’s you know somewhere in Europe and as these different currencies are deployed.

 

They’ll really be able to build almost a very well put together social graph of who you’re paying. I mean it’s very similar to Venmo. When Venmo had the kind of privacy era, when you could see every transaction. If you had your transaction on public that you sent all your friends, right?

 

This is almost like that but the Central Bank can see that for every single person. Now we know who interacts with who, where you go, you know if you’re going to get coffee at Starbucks every morning. Where you’re going to be you know it’s very interesting to see the amount of power that you know these Central Banks in my opinion are going to start are going to gain over deploying a currency. Where it’s traceable trackable and it’s on a single ledger.

 

TN: Right, well also imagine, you know right now we have macroeconomic data releases like gross domestic product or industrial production or retail sales, those sorts of things. Imagine you know right now the way that happens is a statistics ministry does an estimate of what that economic activity is and they release it like a month after it actually happens. And then they revise it four times before they finally give up and say that this macroeconomic variable is finished.

 

If you do have a centralized kind of ledger for this stuff, you can actually look at national and global economic activity on a real-time basis, right? So you could actually see through Covid. You could see the U.S. economy declining on a real-time basis or the Europe economy declining on a real-time basis which would be pretty scary actually but that’s the reality of it. If you have this centralized ledger you can see let’s say, the velocity of that currency grinding to a halt as people don’t spend money which from a Central Bank perspective can help you understand how to incentivize people to spend money if they have it.

 

So from a kind of centralized monitoring of the economy perspective. I could see that being beneficial from a consumer and an individual saver. Spender perspective, I can see that being a little bit scary.

 

JB: It is a little bit scary but I agree with you also with the Covid situation. You know, the stimulus, really in my opinion didn’t get to the people as well as it should have. And Central Bank digital currencies will allow the these Central Banks to give stimulus to those who are most affected, at least in theory. And to be able to provide you know potentially different access to credit for different types of individuals we’re taking different types of risk being business owners or just employees. But on the Covid kind of analysis and as you guys with CI were we’re doing the analysis on the equity markets and in oil. And different types of currencies. Did you guys see any indicators you know as Covid was picking up in the analysis of the market. And how did it affect your predictions in these you know kind of broadly over the different markets that you guys predict and watch.

 

TN: I think what we saw in the wake of Covid was, and this is no surprise to anybody I don’t think is. A move to very short-term thinking you know, what data points are coming out. What’s moving. What are people doing let’s track to day what’s actually happening. Also an eye on kind of what is the government doing. What stimulus is coming out. When is it coming out. How much is it. Where is it going that sort of thing.

 

So I think for the probably three to four months I would say until July or August, a lot of trading and forecasting was really done on that basis kind of the news moved the market. It was fear and news that really moved markets and we had to come to a place where the size of the dump truck of stimulus was bigger than the fear that people had of Covid. And when we got to a number big enough you started to see markets break higher. Which was I guess a positive thing for people who weren’t working but getting stimulus from government so they could kind of day trade and make some money in markets to shore up some of their bills.

 

Now that the stimulus has gone out and now that we see at least some markets coming back to I wouldn’t say normal but at least to a significant level. We’re starting to see or we’ve started to see over the past, say six to ten weeks, more fundamental basis put into markets and put into some of those those value decisions whether it’s in equity or whether it’s a commodity or something. It’s still playing out in a number of ways a lot of the texts still very sentiment and stimulus based.

 

We see things like you know some of the commodities that are still very much based on that or I would say kind of more than 50 based on that but we’re starting to see markets move back into a direction that’s a bit more traditionally based and I use that term very loosely traditionally based but with at least a bit of fundamental analysis. But you know look at something like Tesla for example the price to earnings ratio is around 1100, I think something like that. It’s just I mean you may love Tesla but that’s a pretty healthy multiple, right? So you know at some point and I’m not necessarily predicting Tesla will fall to earth but at some point something will catch up with the valuations of these things.

 

Whether they’re commodities or whether they’re equities and will start to value things on a more traditional again. That’s a loose application there but on a more traditional basis.

 

TN: One of the things that I’ve been noticing in just conversations is it seems like you know the stock market is almost I would say really turning into a casino. Where you have people just buying stocks they heard on the news. They’re getting the motley fool every week and they have so many decisions to make. So many different options and I’ve noticed that it seems to be just too complex for I would say normal retail robinhood traders. They get overwhelmed with so many decisions. I think one of the nice things you know about value as we talked about valuing crypto. Is at least with Bitcoin you know what you’re getting. You know that this is an asset with a stable monetary supply with a stable issuance rate over the next 100 years.

 

What are your thoughts on how bitcoin mining? I’m actually gonna change it up and move to a separate topic a different topic but what are your thoughts on Bitcoin mining and how it relies on as on the global supply chain starts in semiconductor factories in China and you mentioned the supply chain optimization a lot on your website as a function of Complete Intelligence. Can you walk through a little bit how you guys optimize supply chain and then I’d love to talk with you through potentially how the Bitcoin mining supply chain works on our end and see where you know optimizations are and and how Covid or any of these other things impact supply chains and what you guys are seeing on a worldwide basis?

 

TN: Sure, that’s great, I think with any supply chain you have really three factors. You have cost, you have distance, and you have time, okay? And so I mean there’s quality as well but if you assume that you can get equal quality in you know in multiple locations. You have cost, distance and time. And so we help people initially with costs, okay? We’re helping them to kind of arbitrage the best cost locations.

 

We have a client who manufactures confectionary that makes candies and sweets. And they buy sugar, I think at eight different places around the world and so we help them understand where the sugar price is because there’s not a single global sugar price, right? There are local factors so we we help them understand where sugar prices will change and at what magnitude they change.

 

So that their factories can be prepared and that they can have the right margin they need so that they can take in the right inventory. So that they can make the right transactions at the right time. So I think from a pure cost basis with commodities for example like sugar, it’s possible to do that. When you look at something like semiconductors with a very sophisticated manufacturing process.

 

Cost is probably not the only, well I can assure it’s not the only factor associated with the decision. So then you start looking at things like time and you look at things like distance and so when we go back to say March, April, May, a lot of semiconductors travel by air and we had air freight rates from Asia to the U.S. that were normally say a dollar fifty a kilogram. That had in many cases been jacked up to say 15 dollars a kilogram. So, 10 times or more of the normal price. So that’s where distance becomes or let’s say cost becomes a function of distance, right? And so that’s that chipset that semiconductor may cost the same x factory but getting it to the destination is increasingly critical and increasingly costly.

 

So, that’s where we help people also to understand what the cost of that distance is and what the cost of that time is because you could put it on a vessel and you could ship it and it could take three weeks to get where it needs to go. But in many cases the cost of those the finished goods are high enough that you can absorb some of that transport cost. Okay? So there are a number of ways that we help people understand those transactions but at the end of the day it all has to do with the cost of that bill of material, meaning the cost of the goods that go into that finished item that’s ultimately sold to a customer.

 

So when we look at semiconductors for example and you look at what has happened over the last, particularly last year and if you look at say TSMC Taiwan semiconductor. Moving one of their locations to I think it’s Arizona in the U.S. We’re starting to get more of that high value supply chain in the U.S. more as a function to de-risk supply chains in the wake of Covid meaning, factories in China closed during Covid people still had to make stuff and they had to still have their business open but they couldn’t because the factories in China were closed.

 

Once the factories in China opened. There was constrained transport capacity so it would cost them a lot more so they had goods that were late and they had goods that were a lot more expensive than normal. And so I think what a lot of manufacturers have done especially in the wake of Covid and said, look we need to diversify our supply chains and have multiple sources for some of these high-value goods and we Complete Intelligence have been talking about regionalization of trade since 2017. We wrote about it more formally in say starting Feb of 18 when the steel and aluminum tariffs were put on by the current administration but we’ve believed for years that we would start to see a re-regionalization of trade and that cuts out some of the risk associated with supply chains and some of those costs. Maybe, transport costs that may be lower are offset by maybe marginally higher say labor or taxes or something like that either in the U.S. or Mexico or something.

 

So one of the things that many people don’t necessarily understand is when China came into the WTO in 2000 the U.S. was in the first decade of the NAFTA agreement North American Free Trade Agreement at the time there were a lot of manufactured there was a lot of manufacturing for the U.S. done in Mexico. Part of the reason a lot of factories moved to China was because electricity in Mexico was really really expensive at the time, okay? And the electricity in China was really cheap. So a lot of these manufacturing especially energy intensive manufacturing firms moved to China to save on their electricity. Which was a large fun factor within their total cost. So what’s happened in Mexico over the last… I think four years is laws were passed to deregulate the electricity market in Mexico. So now you have power in Mexico that’s a lot cheaper than it was 15, 20 years ago. So the attractiveness of Mexico as a location at least from a cost basis is quite a bit higher than it was in the past and especially quite a bit higher than it was when firms were leaving Mexico to go to China.

 

JB: So Tony you mentioned the impact of of Covid on these supply chains and I want to talk a little bit about something that we have in in Bitcoin mining called the supply gap. And it basically what that is when the price of Bitcoin is is skyrocketing and is hitting an all-time high, like it did back in 2017. The underlying you know value of these Bitcoin miners really relies on the profitability of those machines and that is heavily relies on the price of of Bitcoin.

 

So what we see is that you know these supply chains they they shrivel up, almost. They you know there’s being able to order machines over a three-month period it ends up going out to six months. You won’t be able to get machines and you know until six months later. Do you see this sent not centralization but going from globalization back to Mexico. Back to these localized economies. Do you see that helping these kind of massive supply fluctuations or kind of I guess events that occur specifically you know with Bitcoin price and Bitcoin miners but I guess also globally with events like code that really do shock the system we know of today.

 

TN: Yeah, I do. I think that of course you know we’re going to have some difficulties in the early days of it. We’re going to have some awkward moments where things don’t work as people plan, that sort of thing. Whenever you have a large systemic change you always have some moments that are a little bit embarrassing and cause you to second-guess the decision. We’re going to have those that’s normal but I think over time. What we’re building is a more robust global supply chain you know. Something like 40 of all manufactured goods are made in Northeast Asia, China, Korea, Japan and as we have re-regionalization of manufacturing and that’s to North America, that’s to Europe and so on. We have a diversity of manufacturing locations and so if there is let’s say Covid in China or in Asia but it hasn’t hit the U.S. yet then you know it’s possible to use additional capacity in say U.S. or European factories to help meet the needs of Bitcoin miners, right? Depending on what we’re doing. Depending on the sophistication of those factories and the capacity of those factories but I believe that as we have regionalization of supply chains you have much more robustness in those supply chains.

 

I also think that in the wake of Covid… so I lived in Asia for 15 years. I just moved back to the U.S. in 2017. I lived through probably five or six pandemics in that time and so we got a little bit used to it. In the U.S. it’s relatively new and I think people here trying to figure out how to contend with it and kind of the calibration of risk in the U.S. to pandemics is it’s new. So people aren’t really sure what it means or doesn’t mean. So the global transmission of viruses is not something that’s really going away. So will we have more code like viruses coming out of Asia or coming out of Europe or the U.S. It’s likely and so we’re at a point where we have to have regionalization of supply chains.

 

So first we have robust supply chains where we can source from the U.S., Europe, Asia wherever we want as capacity as demand and as costs require but also we have the flexibility if there is one of those events whether it’s a disease event or whether it’s you know let’s say a war or something like that. We have the flexibility to make stuff in other parts of the world too. So if there was a devastating conflict in Northeast Asia today. Global supply chains would be paralyzed that’s just a fact and so the sooner we can get regionalized supply chains the better, we’re all off because the risk of a let’s say a conflict in Northern Asia, if it ever happens, it won’t impact everyone on the planet as much as it would.

 

JB: We definitely, I agree are seeing that de-risking and a big huge news with a semiconductor in TSMC moving to potentially the United States to build a facility you know hopefully reducing on that that distance for Bitcoin miners specifically. I found it very interesting that you mentioned about Mexico and the electricity prices there. To understanding that those manufacturers actually had to leave Mexico and went to China because it was too you know too expensive to extract or to complete that manufacturing process. I view Bitcoin mining as a way to almost extracting you know Bitcoin from the network through a manufacturing process where we’re using these Bitcoin miners and large amounts of energy to do just that.

 

So I wanted to talk farther about how you’ve worked with clients in either the natural gas or the energy sectors in the United States specifically and pricing out those markets and where do you see the future of this industry going the electricity market specifically and the cost of power in the United States?

 

TN: Sure, so I’m in Texas the cost of natural gas is very low and the abundance of natural gas is very high. So electricity prices to be honest is not really something we worry about here. I know in other parts of the country and other parts of the world it is a worry you know, electricity is something that has kind of always been very regional and it has been always been very feedstock specific if you’re burning oil to make electricity or coal or nuclear or whatever and you really have to look at that blended cost, right? but in Texas we’re looking at a lot of natural gas to fuel our electricity. So not that much of a worry for us and and in this region it’s not that much of a worry.
I think in places like Europe where they’re net gas importers, I think it’s more of a worry and there’s always a lot of discussion around importing gas from say Russia or from the Middle East or from the U.S. I think they have an abundance of choice there but it’s relatively more expensive there than it is say here in the U.S.

 

I think in Asia you have a lot of imports from the Middle East particularly places like Qatar, these sorts of things for natural gas. China uses a lot of coal something like 70 plus percent of their power generation is from coal and it’s really hard to um to wean themselves off of that. Japan is a very large LNG and natural gas importer because they shut off their nuclear power after the incidents in 2010 or 2012 sorry with the reactors the Fukushima reactors. So you know it really all depends on the local power generation capacity in feedstocks. But I think generally you know we’re not necessarily seeing a world where hydrocarbons become all that expensive for quite some time. When we look at what Covid did to demand the demand destruction that Covid brought about is is pretty shocking that applies to industries and that applies to consumers so we don’t see say oil prices or natural gas prices hitting let’s say the highs of 2008 for quite some time. And you know since they are relatively global commodities although there are differences in certain aspects of them it also pushes down the prices, let’s say in other parts of the world say the middle east and so on and so forth. So we don’t see electricity prices outside of say regulatory impacts or things like fixed investment requirements.

 

So let’s say there’s a regulatory requirement that a power station can only be say 20 years old you know that’s a significant cost that would add to electricity prices but other than that it seems to us that the feedstocks, although we don’t necessarily expect to see kind of negative 37 oil like we saw in April. We don’t necessarily see energy price inflation coming anytime in the next say 24 months. And if you look at things like gasoline I know this isn’t electricity but things like gasoline prices are down say 30 percent from where they were a year or so ago. And they’re expected to remain that low at least for the next six to 12 months. So it’s not just electricity it’s also gasoline or petrol as well where because of muted demand prices will remain relatively low.

 

JB: I think that’s that’s great news for for miners in the in the United States and you know I really cross the world as more and more energy generation comes online. We’re seeing that that cost to produce coins is continuing to get cheaper and which allows miners here in the U.S. to compete if not beat miners in China on the cost per kilowatt hour. Tony, was there any other trends that you guys are focusing on right now in regards in to your investment portfolio analysis that you wanted to highlight on the show today?

 

TN: JP, I think there are hundreds of trends we’re following but I think we’ve cut most of the main ones. I think really it’s you know understanding risk of any asset that we follow or our clients follow is really really important. Whether it’s cryptocurrencies or whether it’s oil and gas or whether it’s you know I don’t know the SP500. Understanding the risk there is really critical we’re always trying to figure out how to balance the risk and opportunity associated with the assets that we forecast and that’s I would say for any of your listeners that’s the really critical part to understand. So you know we could pursue this down any avenue and I’m sure we could talk for another hour on you know on just about any asset. So I really appreciated the time today it’s been a fantastic discussion, thank you very much.

 

JB: Yes, thank you Tony it was great to have you on. I want to offer you the opportunity to join you have any questions that you want to ask me about Bitcoin specifically that you want the audience to make sure they hear, anything that’s on your mind?

 

TN: You know, I guess what I am curious about Bitcoin is you know we saw a bump in 2017. I think largely driven by broad awareness or a more broad awareness of the opportunities in Bitcoin. What will drive the next bump in Bitcoin or crypto value? What do you see driving that next rise let’s say 30 to 40 to 50 rise in the value of of cryptocurrencies?

 

JB: So the way I view the cryptocurrency market and really Bitcoin specifically is I’m all about as the stock to flow ratio and how that bitcoin is created. So when that having event occurs I got into cryptocurrency back in 2013. So I’ve been through two of these having events now and when that have even occurred in 2016 we see that it kicks off like a real almost momentum. Moving into the space where the cost of creating these new coins is exponentially higher, makes it so that all these older machines have to come offline and it really does a disservice or really degrades the value of these mining machines it makes the profitability got cut in half. And so when that happens I think that there are these the lack of coins new coins coming into the system, creates the momentum which is needed to push the price up to those 2017 highs you were talking about or potentially you know 2021, 2022 highs, simply saying it doesn’t happen instantly because it does take a while to get there but I expect that to you know to happen in the next coming years. Not necessarily because of one event but simply because of the schedule of new coins coming out of the market.

 

TN: So sorry if I understood you correctly are you also saying that the age of the infrastructure that the miners are working on has an impact on the so the replacement cost of that infrastructure also puts upward pressure on the price of bitcoin?

 

JB: I would say that exactly so the fact that we have to replace machines that have less efficiency. So the joules per tera hash or how well they can turn one watt of energy into one terra hash of mining power is needs to be upgraded by 50 so if you have a machine that was running 100 joules per terahash like the s9 that machine is no longer and it was just barely making money that machine is no longer going to be even anywhere close to profitable because of this having event, you know now, you would need to go upgrade all of your machines so they run at the 50 joules per tera hash level or you need to find half the cost of electricity and that is very hard to do especially because these facilities are massive with hundreds of megawatts of power.

 

So that’s what I drive as the underlying driver to this Bitcoin price push that we see every four years if you look back on the chart it happens every four years. Simply because the miners place such they’re one of the biggest components of the ecosystem there’s about five billion dollars in mining rewards today every year and that’s a huge driver in a relatively small market where Bitcoin is currently sitting.

 

TN: Interesting, so that that replacement cycle like you said it’s and this is a question it’s not a statement that’s that’s about every four years give or take.

 

JB: Every four years give or take either have to replace your equipment with newer machines which now you’re waiting in line because you know everyone else in the whole bitcoin network has to do that or you’re moving to power where it’s half as expensive but all miners are always searching for the cheapest power so that’s something that’s always occurring.

 

TN: Okay, so with the kind of the supply chain hiccups that we saw with Covid does that push that replacement cycle back like are is that replacement cycle being pushed back by six to nine months so or is that do we have a pent-up kind of inflation meaning. Do you believe that the value of bitcoin being driven up will last for longer because of the supply chain issues we saw in Covid?

 

JB: So with this definitely the supply chain issues in Covid it affected our shipping rates as you mentioned those increased dramatically it affected how fast machines could get out it actually caused bitmain and some of the other major manufacturers to delay their shipping by two or three months. So if you were to buy a batch to be delivered in November it still hasn’t been delivered.

 

So there is that that pushback and we’ve seen that greatly affect the market regarding the deployment of these machines and kind of scaling with the recent bitcoin price-wise guys new machines are very hard to get. I would say about maybe 10,000 to 15,000 new machines per month are coming to the U.S. And that might be even on the higher range that’s about 50 megawatts of power per month coming to the U.S. and coming out of these factories. Which is is only 50 million dollars worth of capital. So we have huge constraints on the semiconductor themselves and being making those mining machines and when the price of bitcoin even jumps up like it has over the past couple of days up to the 13,000 mark that’s going to create even more external pressure even more interest in mining which makes it even harder to get those machines and will push out the timeline even farther.
So yes it’s a huge issue when it comes to supply chain management because of Covid and the Bitcoin price increasing investors appetite to get exposure the space.

 

TN: Fantastic that’s really interesting. Thanks for that.

 

JB: Of course Tony, well thank you for coming on. I appreciate it and I’m glad we’re able to have you on. Thanks again Tony.

 

TN: Thank you, hope to speak soon. Have a great day. Thanks JP, bye-bye.

Categories
QuickHit

QuickHit: Decentralized Finance and Crypto

JP Baric, of Aurum Capital Ventures, joins Tony Nash for this week’s QuickHit episode where he discussed crypto currencies and how it plays in decentralized finance or de-fi. Also, what is stranded energy and how is it mined? What is the future of crypto and why is its fiat currency value is very volatile? Was the industry affected by Covid? If so, how?

 

Aurum Capital Ventures is a company that’s focused on using stranded energy to mine cryptocurrency and other digital currencies and building a yield generation or building a way to generate yield through the mining process for consumers and for institutional investors.

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

📺 Subscribe to our Youtube Channel.

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

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

 

***This QuickHit episode was recorded on November 4, 2020.

 

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

 

Show Notes:

 

TN: Okay. Very interesting. So I want to go into a couple things about cryptocurrency. But first, I want to ask what is stranded energy?

 

JB: Sure. So stranded energy is energy that is either not accessible to the grid so it can’t connect to the standard power grid or energy that’s been built up in areas where the federal subsidies for wind and solar farms have basically built these infrastructure that wasn’t needed in one area but it was built there because of those subsidies and in return the power prices are actually going negative during the night because there’s over supply and not enough demand. So that’s where we target when we build out mining sites.

 

TN: Very interesting. Okay. Thanks, JP. So let me ask you this. Just in terms of some crypto basics, okay. Is cryptocurrency, is it an asset or is it a currency? And so by that, you know gold is an asset, right? You know you can’t really go to 7/11 and spend gold. Dollar’s a currency. You can go to 7-eleven and spend a dollar.

 

So is cryptocurrency is it an asset? Is it a currency? Is it both? Is it moving from one to another? How do you think of it?

 

JB: Yeah, the more I look and think about Bitcoin is the more I think it’s actually an asset less than a currency. I’ve used bitcoin to buy laptops that you know 12 bitcoins for a laptop and then you realize that’s worth more than a house eventually. So I think the Bitcoin as an asset is really where how I view it. It’s a way to store value digitally that can easily be separated and transferred anywhere in the world and you also, it’s an asset that we know there’s a finite supply of it. We know how much there’s going to be, how many new bitcoins are going to be every day for the next 100 years and there’s not, that’s something you can’t really get without saying many other assets.

 

The reason why I don’t think it’s a currency is because we’ve seen other people have built on the Bitcoin blockchain and built on top of it as a way to build stable coins or other ways to transact, which are just more efficient and don’t have the price fluctuations that you do with using Bitcoin as a medium of exchange.

 

TN: Okay. So one of the things I’m really puzzled about with Bitcoin is, you know, normally with software, it’s the newer versions that are more desirable and more valuable, okay. Bitcoin is kind of the, you know, Windows 3.1 or something like that I mean it’s the OG of cryptocurrencies, right. So why is Bitcoin more desirable and valuable than other coins?

 

JB: So my opinion really comes down to first the miners. The miners are the ones who are allocating the most amount of capital in the space, who are taking the risk to capture this Bitcoin. You have to put that capital up uh millions of dollars when building out the infrastructure before they even see return. So because the miners are centrally focused around Bitcoin, it’s um you know the top currency for miners. I’ve seen that network effect um has really grown Bitcoin to keep its position and its power.

 

The amount of computing power protecting the Bitcoin network is ten times if not a hundred times more than any of the other networks out there. That would always say the first thing. The second thing is the on-ramps. To use a digital currency like bitcoin we need um on-ramps that have been put together over the past 10 years and have been focused solely on building on-ramps for this cryptocurrency.

 

Bitcoin works in the way and it functions as that secure digi secured and digital store of value. Other currencies have tried to do that. But the reason why it’s a store of value goes back to my first point which is the miner spending all that capital and infrastructure to secure the network using that energy on a day-to-day basis and giving Bitcoin that
floor price.

 

TN: Okay. So when you say on-ramps, what do you mean? So if I have a new coin, I need to have a way to be able to uh uh mine it and distribute it. Is that what you’re talking about?

 

JB: I was uh when I was referring to on-ramps, I was actually referring to fiat on-ramp. So basically, how does fiat currency come into the space. So US Dollars, Euros, Japanese Yen, how do they come into the space and then from there how does that get turned into this digital currency?

 

Those are on-ramps. Then also custody solutions, insurance. All right. Okay. All of that being on ramps.

 

TN: Okay. Very good. Okay. So um also in terms of crypto, what I’m really interested also also is when I look at the current environment, we’re in the wake of an election in the US. It’s a little bit uncertain. We’ve got, we’re in the wake of Covid. There’s a lot of uncertainty, you know. Is there kind of an optimal, say, environment for cryptocurrencies? Um, uh you know. Do we see say um uh confidence in traditional currencies waning and people moving to cryptocurrencies?

 

Is it in either or world or you know. Is it both and and what does that environment look like for people to turn their attention to cryptocurrencies?

 

JB: So I think the the as you mentioned the two different types of pandemic. The Covid pandemic and the election has really pushed crypto to the forefront as another asset class, as a safe haven. I don’t think cryptocurrency necessarily follows uh the same, you know, SP500 or other type of cycles out there when it comes to economics and social cycles. Bitcoin to me really follows the having events, which happen every four years. And so that would, that in my mind is what brings the momentum required to push Bitcoin to a new price. And in those having events is when Bitcoin miners receive half of the amount of Bitcoins they were getting every day just simply because it’s past
the four years and the issue and schedule is set.

 

So as I mentioned, we’ll know exactly how many coins are coming out. That in my opinion, is what creates these price rises about every four years, which then drives new interest to Bitcoin which then drives more speculation and which then drives the community growing at massive scale. And then shrinking because the people that are just speculators, just coming in to make a quick buck, they make their quick buck or they lose a lot of money. But the people who then now start to understand the technology and understand how much better of a monetary system it is because it empowers the user.

 

It provides them a steady base that they can build their life on. A steady-based currency that they know is not going to be inflated away and don’t they know it’s going to retain its value over the long period of time.

 

TN: Okay and so when you talk about having events, what happens around those having events in terms of say processing power, in terms of the the computing requirements. Are there cycles to build up more equipment and less as it ages and and what does that look like?

 

JB: So right now, they’re the cycle. There’s definitely there are cycles to build up equipment and the in May, when was that that having event occurred, the the amount of machines came down by about 15% 20%. And those machines were turned off because they were just older generation. The newer machines are coming in line. They’re being deployed. But we see it as in, if you want to get into Bitcoin mining, the next two years after the having event are the best time to get in because as I mentioned, that momentum will start to build up the Bitcoin price will continue to rise. You’ll have a great two years of profitability and you’ll be very very profitable and you’ll be a big arbitrage there. But then as Bitcoin price rises to an extreme height, there’s not enough actual bitcoin miners available for everyone to buy and acquire.

 

We don’t have enough semiconductors and so what happens is the value of those machines will rise rapidly and the people that are just coming into the space that are new are trying to pick them up and grab them and buying these machines for a really top dollar. The problem is, is that bitcoin price will crash. But you still have new machines on order for maybe six or nine months out. Those machines will continue to come online, will continue to run until it squeezes the profitability of all the miners and then you see a crash in difficulty usually in correlation as the bitcoin price is continuing to push down back to a normalized you know area and not in the hundred thousand dollars ranges or really overvalued where we see it uh once it kind of starts that on ramp.

 

TN: Okay. So when you say there’s a hardware replacement after the having event. So my understanding is this, you’re getting half the amount of Bitcoin for doing the same amount of work. You have old equipment. It’s it’s uh utilizing the same energy it did at double the price. So you have to cycle out that old equipment so you can still be profitable in your Bitcoin mining. Is that?

 

JB: That’s exactly right. That’s exactly. We either cycle the equipment or we move to lower cost power about half the cost in order to stay competitive. Those machines aren’t necessarily going to immediately become unprofitable after having. But they will become unprofitable very quickly after the having. And now, because Bitcoin price has risen, those machines you actually can turn back on and make a few pennies depending on what your power rates are.

 

TN: Okay. And so, since it’s so equipment intensive and we have supply chains bottleneck through Covid out of Asia, what has that done to the Bitcoin mining environment? Is it, has it, has Bitcoin risen in price as a result of it? Or are people using less efficient machines and maybe losing money or coming close to losing money on mining?

 

What’s happening as a result of the supply chain issues that we saw out of Asia earlier this year and also is there still kind of pent-up demand for that equipment?

 

JB: Yeah. So right now, the you know, with Covid and the supply chain issues that have occurred, the machines got backed up, the factories had to close, and so those orders that were maybe supposed to deliver in December of this year aren’t going to deliver until January or February. So they have been backed up by two months. Also due to 5G and the new phones coming out, the the amount of chip production capacity that is allocated to Bitcoin miners from the fabrication facilities like TSMC that has gone down as well um and they’re not able to get as many chips as they would like.

 

Right now, if you’re buying miners and you’re doing a project like we’re looking to do one in Oklahoma to buy 50 megawatts worth of miners or 15 000 machines, it’s going to take us about four months to acquire those machines and get them delivered to the United States in multiple batches. So that’s the, you know, the expected timeline to wait for these newer machines. But as they do ship from bitmain and from the manufacturers, we expect that hash rate to continue to grow and as Bitcoin price grows faster, it’s going to create more demand and it’s that vicious cycle.

 

TN: Interesting. Okay. So as you look out at the next year, are there certain things you’re looking for like are there coins that that you’re interested in? Are there you know, where is your attention going and what do you see over the next say six months in the crypto cryptocurrency environment?

 

JB: So over the next six months you know I’m I’m really focused on bitcoin particularly. But I do think decentralized finance. So de-fi has a lot of opportunity. There’s a lot of very cool projects. One of them being a token called lend token. L-E-N-D. And that token has something called a flash loan. And what flash loans are is that a concept that liquidity is no longer an issue for anyone that can prove there’s an arbitrage opportunity on in the market. And so, when these Ethereum contracts are written, um they basically have to balance the price points and if the prices start to become a little bit off, someone can go in and balance that contract and take the reward for balancing that contract. Before, you might have to put up the capital yourself to do these balances so that you can make the profits from balancing this contract and getting that arbitrage there. No longer do you need to do that with protocols like LEND, which are really trying to decentralize the credit problem. Decentralize uh what is credit look like on the blockchain. How do we give credit to companies.

 

How do we ensure that um we can lend to them without necessarily having to verify uh everything and do the, you know, do the verification process we have currently but how do we do that on chain in a contract. So protocols like that are what I’m really focused on. I think decentralized finance is going to blow up. I think it’ll be the next ICO hype as we would say in 2016, 2017. There’ll be good projects and there’ll be projects like we saw with Sushi that, you know, the developer just ran away with the funds because the contracts weren’t audited. That’s another big thing. If you’re investing in a project or investing anything, you want to make sure that it’s backed by you know VC companies in the United States that are these very popular VC companies in China and Europe or that it’s been audited by reputable sources in the community.

 

TN: Great. Okay JP. Thanks so much for your time today. I know you’ve got a lot going on so uh thanks so much for joining us and talking about this. Really appreciate this. Wish you all the best um over the next six months as all those things come to come to pass. I also want to thank our viewers and remind you please subscribe to our YouTube page. Please subscribe to our newsletter. Both are in the foot of the video. Thanks very much.

Categories
QuickHit

QuickHit: The Great Decoupling and the Future of US-China Relations (Part 2)

This is Part 2 of the first ever QuickHit #CageMatch with political-economic advisor Albert Marko and China expert Christopher Balding on the great decoupling of US and China. The second part of this is on the Belt And Road Initiative and the answer that the US may have to the BRI. We also talked about the corporate activities — are the US and China targeting corporates? How does that work and how would that play within the environment of decoupling.

 

For the first part, we’ve covered the US foreign policy, looking at Latin America, Africa, and parts of Asia. We looked at US-China trade and a number of other aspects around the US-China relationship. 

 

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

📺 Subscribe to our Youtube Channel.

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

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

 

This QuickHit episode was recorded on October 14, 2020.

 

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

 

SHOW NOTES

 

TN: Now let’s let’s move along a little bit more into economics and talk about the Belt and Road Initiative, which something that I actually worked on for about a year and a half. There’s been some talk in the last few months about the anglosphere and will the West have an answer to the BRI. Does the US need a response to the BRI as a government initiative and if so, do you think they can do it? That question is from @Sw33tYams.

 

CB: Just as rappers get shown to the VIP room, if you’re a country and you are offering goodies, you’re gonna get shown to the VIP room in whatever country you go to. That doesn’t mean it has to be the Trump and air initiative. We do need to think about and we should absolutely put effort into how can the US provide positive things to countries.

 

Why don’t we set up an office that says, I have a company in China that makes XYZ product and they want to move out of China. We have a database of where to go. I know bankers in Vietnam that we’re like, “hey we’re just getting slammed. Why doesn’t the US have an office of infrastructure for emerging markets like Vietnam to help get migrating Chinese companies, those types of goodies, even in a lot of different forms it could take, are going to open a lot more doors than just saying it’s the right thing to do.

 

AM: I agree. But it’s also gonna need a little bit of help from our partners specifically Australia, the UK plus Japan. Basically five I’s plus Japan. It’s going to need shared cost. Supply chains have to move. It’s going to take a little while. It’s going to take a little bit effort from everybody.

 

TN: So it’s basically a government kind of somewhat directed but not necessarily directly involved. What you’re saying is Americans will take a a little easier hand than the Chinese kind of very direct hand in say
these multilateral or multi-country activities. Is that fair to say?

 

CB: I can give one example I was told about and this is something I’m surprised hasn’t gotten more attention. The Commerce Department apparently has a tariff waiver program where if you say, “look, we have this plant in China. It’s facing tariffs. Here’s our 180-day plan to get to move our production to Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Africa wherever.” The Commerce Department will give you a waiver for, whatever time period if you give them a plan. That’s the kind of stuff that should be more publicized and the US government is taking an active role to partner with business to say, “you take the lead and if you’re doing it, we’ll help you.”

 

TN: Let me throw you the next question, Albert. This is from @Ellis_Greenwood. How long will it take the US to decouple from China? So if we assume what Chris just talked about with some of the say Commerce Department activities, these other things, does the US really wanted to decouple from China fully and if so, how long will it take to get either to that level or to say a desired level that that US companies would want to?

 

AM: A desired level is the right term. We’re not going to fully decouple from China. That’s just absurd. When they’re talking about moving supply chains, I’ve heard all sorts of 15, 20 years to one year and it actually depends on each sector. It’s a lot easier to move a software gaming company rather than a pharmaceutical manufacturing company. It can take anywhere from one year to ten to fifteen years.

 

TN: What do you think about that, Chris?

 

CB: I think that’s generally accurate. A lot of the stuff that China was known for over the years, like let’s say low-wage manufacturing, assembly, that type of stuff… I mean Apple set up, a plant in India, which can make iPhones in about 18 months. As Albert pointed out, people think of decoupling as there’s not going to be trade between the US and China. I think what you’re really seeing is this move to bipolar supply chain worlds especially in tech. So there’s going to be a China-specific manufacturing world for tech stuff and a non-China because, you can already see the US government and other governments and even companies saying, “hey, your tech is not been touched by China.”

 

TN: Frankly, I believe that’s what China has wanted all along is their own Chinese ecosystem and then a rest of world ecosystem so they can control that technology and the messaging over that technology. That’s what they had 20 years ago, and there’s been the things overlapping for the last 10 years and I believe that deep down, they really want a separation of those things.

 

This is @candideXXI, “what will be the political and economic pressures outcomes produced by the ending of Chinese investment and the debt expansionary cycle,” which is an interesting question but maybe going to one or two things. Underlying that question is, is that expected to happen? A lot of people have this question on their brain but I don’t necessarily see that happening in the next three to five years. These things tend to go a lot longer than many people assume.

 

CB: Let’s assume that China went to 0% debt growth right now. Honestly, China would be in flames by the end of the day. It would explode. Xi would be lynched by the end of the day. The number that I saw and it’s a staggering number, is debt to GDP in China this year is going to increase by upwards of 30%. So it’s going to go from 300% to 330% in one year. That’s a staggering number. I don’t see they’re going to keep this going as long as possible. For them to get this under control is going to be at least a 10, 20 year cycle at best. And in all likelihood, they’re headed for North Korean financial system with Japanese debt. That’s the only logical outcome. Because if they were to open up the capital markets, the RMB would drop 50% easy.

 

TN: So what you’re saying is, there’s a possibility that CNY could be a global currency?

 

CB: That’s exactly what I’m saying, yes. Exactly what I’m saying.

 

AM: Yeah I agree with Chris here. China’s well within the Euro Dollar system. They need dollars. They can’t get away from Dollars. They need it for their debt. They multiply it out to issue more Renmimbis out to the emerging markets. They’re not leaving and they’re not getting out of the system.

 

TN: Let’s take it more into the corporate realm as well. When we look at like Huawei and Tiktok and some of the Chinese companies that have a large international presence, given the dynamics at home, if the US continues to cut off these companies and some of their crucial activities overseas, how does that bend back onto China? How dire is it? Is it not a big deal or is it pretty dire not just in terms of acquiring technology but in terms of actually making money and keeping the home markets floating?

 

AM: That’s the name of the game is making money for them. They need dollars from overseas desperately. Without that, their entire financial system implodes. They go out to Africa and then they loan out Renminbis and they expect money paid back in dollars at all times. So without the dollar, they’re just buying time.

 

CB: Especially in the tech sector, these are guys that maybe have been abroad for a fair amount of time. They want to emulate the Googles. They want to be international. They think of themselves as cosmopolitan even if they grew up in the system. And so, even though they might be pro-China, which is different than like pro-CCP, they want to be a part of that global tech scene. To have those limitations on them is a constraint that they don’t necessarily like. But that’s the reality of the system that they find themselves in.

 

TN: So will they change their behaviors to align with the constraints outlined by the US or will they remain true to what the CCP tells them to do and their business will suffer internationally?

 

CB: Business will suffer internationally because the reality is, as a Chinese business, you can’t get away from that. As soon as Jack Ma says I’m gonna obey the SEC and file this type of audit, they get blown up in China.

 

AM: They can walk a tight rope until they absolutely get pressured by the Chinese government and then they have to fall in line. There’s no other choice for them.

 

TN: We’ve seen more Chinese IPOs in the four years of Trump than we saw under the eight years of Obama. First of all, why is that? Are they just trying to cash in and get dollars into their companies or is there some other reason? Is it possible to continue that pace?

 

AM: I think they’re just taking advantage of the market and being able to cash in and cash out as fast as they possibly can. Do I think it’s sustainable? Absolutely not. This market’s overbought and eventually there’ll be a correction and on top of that I think that the US government needs to have some reasonable accounting standards for Chinese companies that refuse to open their books for transparency. It boggles my mind. At this point, why should I just go to China, buy a company and list it on the NASDAQ for some absurd amount of money. There’s nothing saying that I need to open my books. It’s absolutely crazy.

 

CB: This is one of the most frustrating arguments by the China apologists because when you make the same argument that Google, Goldman whoever is not subject to the SEC or US jurisdiction on US financial markets, you make that argument, then I will entertain your argument about Chinese companies. Until then, it’s nonsensical.

 

TN: Okay. So let me just sum this up. China is the biggest US foreign policy issue. China is in an untenable position of having their companies locked down or some of their companies locked down by the US. They have a shortage of dollars. They have unsustainable debt and if the current US policies continue, at least Albert thinks that Chinese leadership is in peril. So, what glass half full view am I not seeing?

 

CB: This is in a way very predictable in the sense that they sit down in November, December and they say, “Okay this is our target for 2021” whatever it is. And because you can see that those numbers are almost so stunningly predictable and what’s amazing is they have a very good idea of what their leakages are going to be. That money that gets leaked out in Macau gaming chips or Bitcoin and all that other good stuff, they know what they have to hit. My favorite thing of all this is that almost nobody knows that they’re already rationing US dollars. Most banks in China have the one-to-one rule that you have to bring in a dollar to send out a dollar. As long as they can continue to balance those books through, it can keep up for a while.

 

AM: I’m at a loss for words almost on that one. For the Chinese, you would hope that they understand how bipolar systems work and understanding the Apple versus Microsoft component as like let the one guy be big and you fill in the gaps and everybody be copacetic. I don’t know if I can buy that for very long. But
that’s my only hope is Xi, if Trump is elected, which I am speculating that he is, comes to this realization and says, “let’s tone down the pressure. Let’s fulfill the Phase One Deal, Phase Two Deal” whatever they want to go into. Make inroads and just ratchet down the tensions.

 

TN: Last question guys. Albert, I know you’ve done a lot of forecasting for the presidential election. What do you think is going to happen? You have some really interesting views and I’d love to hear why and Chris also as he’s talking, it’s your first time to be back here. What are some of your observations and expectations as well.

 

AM: I know we’re seeing all sorts of polling numbers that are just eye-popping and just I cannot believe publishers actually put this out to print. 15 points for Biden. 11 points for Biden.

 

CB: Just today, I actually saw this poll saying Biden up 17.

 

AM: It boggles my mind how these people just either they miss statistics class or just don’t know how to add. But for Biden to be up 17 points, you would have to assume the Democrats come out in some kind of record 80 turnout and on top of that have the republicans, 15 of them either not show up or vote for Biden.

 

TN: But even Reagan’s 84 blowout wasn’t a 17-point win, was it?

 

AM: No. This is what’s boggling to me. I just don’t understand it.

 

We know what California is going to do. We know what New York’s going to do. We just toss those aside. If you look at Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin and Arizona, those are the states that you really have to look at and in almost every single state, the Republicans have gained hundreds of thousands of new registrations. And even in the polling that’s done out there, there’s a few pieces of data that 96 or 94 of Republicans have an approval of Donald Trump. How do you get to 17 point lead, when 94% of Republicans support Donald Trump. That’s just unbelievable to me. The Economist has been my favorite lately of the 99.9% victory for Joe Biden over Donald Trump.

 

These are just silly numbers people throw out there. Coming out of lockdowns, they’re doing 100 phone polling so they have no opportunity to go out to the public and see who they’re talking to. And study after study has shown that Republican voters have been not just shy vote, but actually spiteful of the pollsters and purposely saying that they’re going to vote for Biden. That’s how you get to these 17 point numbers.

 

CB: I try to stay away from politics as much as possible especially on China and stuff like that because whether it is Trump or Biden, I see what we’re in with China as a 20 to 40-year type of challenge. So at some point, there’s going to be Republicans, at some point there’s going to be Democrats. Just from a social perspective and Tony I think you can identify with this. Man, America’s crazy.

 

TN: Democracy is messy, right?

 

CB: I’m a live and let live kind of guy. So if you’re a Democrat, if you’re a Republican, if you’re a Green or a Libertarian, I don’t really care. We can still sit down and smoke a cigar. And I think the thing that just amazes me is America just seems angry and it seemed really angry for a long time.

 

We can all talk about Trump, but both parties can point to things that the others have done that is unethical, that is abnormal. We need to be better citizens to each other. We need to accept losses that, it’s not going to be our time all the time. The political golden rule is don’t advocate a policy that you don’t want used against you.

 

AM: I attribute the hate that we’re seeing now, the polarization, squarely on the weaponization of social media. Completely. Because we can sit there and put out a viral post of someone, take a phrase taken out of context and making that person look like just a demonic figure and then dox the guy, show him his address and have 15 people show up to the house with pitchforks and and torches. It’s just insane. There’s got to be some kind of accountability on social media by either the government or social media standards themselves.

 

TN: Social media doesn’t have standards, Albert, because I know you’re both active on social media.

 

CB: The way I always think about it is, a country or a political party is like a family barbecue. We’ve all gone to those family barbecues and go, “who are these losers that are at this family barbecue?” And if you aren’t going to your own political party or your own country and going, “dang these are some losers I’m hanging out with,” okay I mean, you’re doing it all wrong.

Categories
QuickHit

QuickHit: The Great Decoupling and the Future of US-China Relations (Part 1)

This is the first ever QuickHit #CageMatch with a returning guest, political-economic advisor Albert Marko, and China expert Christopher Balding with us for the first time. This is Part 1 of a 2-part discussion. Visit this page for the second part.

 

Albert Marko helps a couple of financial firms, members of congress, and a couple governments  to manage and navigate their way through the beltway and the legislative issues and the politics and how the economic, how the federal reserve and all the economic policies filter down. Albert is also the co-founder and COO of Favore Media Group.

 

Christopher Balding spends most of his time on the phone talking to people about the data about China. He is a two-time winner of Lifetime Achievement awards and a Professor at Fulbright University Vietnam.

 

Subscribe to CI Newsletter and gain AI-driven intelligence.

Subscribe to our Youtube Channel.

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

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

Follow Tony on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd

Follow Albert on Twitter: https://twitter.com/amlivemon

Follow Chris on Twitter: https://twitter.com/BaldingsWorld

 

This QuickHit episode was recorded on October 14, 2020.

 

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

 

Show Notes

 

TN: We’ve got a bunch of questions off of Twitter and the first one is from @AxeRendale: If you were in charge of U.S. foreign policy. What are the top things you would change from the status quo? They asked about five things. I don’t think we have that much time. So, what are a couple things? Let’s say two things in terms of U.S. foreign policy that you would change. Of course we have the election coming up but regardless of the individual. We’ve seen some status quo upheaval over the past few years but what would you really change not just the top line but the way the U.S. acts?

 

AM: I would immediately start looking at South America and Africa and identifying and eliminating or at least hampering Chinese and Russian interests there, specifically Venezuela would be my number one choice right now. The Chinese and the Russians, they have a field day there. There’s almost no U.S. intervention in there and the same goes for parts of Africa. I know we have troops in Mali and Niger and a couple places to deal with terrorism but just solidifying some of the countries out there like Morocco, Angola and preventing the Chinese from making inroads. I would put make that a priority.

 

CB: So I would agree with Albert in general terms but maybe take it in a slightly different direction. The Trump administration has done a good job shifting the focus to the larger problems and China and taking those policy steps that are well within their grasp.

 

What needs to be the next step, and whether this is under a Trump administration or Biden administration, is the reality is that you can’t handle these issues on the cheap. The Germans and Asian countries are not just going to be persuaded by the moral rightness of confronting China.

 

Just to give you two examples of where you might see something. If the U.S. was to offer even to European countries to fund 5G rollout at like 0% interest loans because that what China is doing. This the way they run the finances is basically giving away the 5G gear. If the U.S. made like 0% interest loans, you could fund that if it was in some type of like a levered development finance corporation structure, where with a couple billion dollars a year honestly, globally. You could do that entire project globally and on the U.S. budget, a couple billion dollars a year is almost couch cushion money.

 

TN: Right, and this is similar to how Japan is competing with China for infrastructure in parts of Asia, right? They’re giving no interest or extreme like 0.3% interest loans for infrastructure, right?

 

CB: Yeah, exactly. Like in Vietnam, where I can speak a little bit more authoritatively, they’re not fans of China. At the same time, they recognize they have to work with China. It’s a very pragmatic approach. At the same time, they we want to give the French certain pieces of the pie, also the Americans. Vietnam is actively trying to balance where their economic investment comes from so that they don’t become too dependent on any one source.

 

TN: Yep, it’s smart.

 

AM: The only issue I have with that is that you’re absolutely correct and that’s exactly what should be done  but it’s depending on the European partners to even come to play ball. Because, within the European Union themselves, there’s competing interests on all sides. And it’s difficult for the United States to try to compete with the Chinese who give 99-year loans for infrastructure in Africa to dictate which European Nation gets a slice of the pie when they’re all conflicting with themselves to begin with. So that’s the only thing I’d have to
say about that.

 

TN: That’s an interesting point. China is very successful in terms of foreign policy by peeling off one member of a block at a time and there’s no better example than the way they peeled off Cambodia from ASEAN in order to break the voting block that’s necessary to get anything through there. They’ve done the same with the E.U. with say Portugal or Greece, right? Do you see the U.S. being able to do that, go and interrupt a block by getting say a single or a couple of allies there? Because I haven’t seen the U.S. do that all that successfully say for 20 years. Do you think we can do that successfully again?

 

AM: I think that we absolutely can be that successful if we actually had the will to do it. The problem is the Chinese are just literally filling in the gaps. The vacuums that the United States have left, and this is something that the United States just needs to get over the dirty word of intervention and just get on with business and solidify U.S. interests abroad.

 

CB: I would actually slightly differ from Albert on this and I see it in a very structural in a very structural way. If you take the E.U. to basically take to move against Chinese interests in Europe, there’s an asymmetry here. The U.S. has to get everybody to agree. China only has to get one to disagree, okay?

 

TN: Why does the U.S. have to get everyone to agree?

 

CB: Because basically, if the E.U. for instance is going to pass a let’s say a regulation blocking Huawei gear, it’s a unanimous vote, okay? That’s the only way it gets through the E.U. is through a unanimous vote. So the U.S. has to get everybody to agree. China only has to get one to disagree.

 

If you look at like the U.N. with the human rights council, we can talk about the U.S. should do this or that with the human rights council. The reality is that China till the end of time is going to have enough votes to put Russia, Venezuela, Libya, etc. on the human rights council because of the the number of countries that there are in the number of countries that they can get to agree with them. So people talk about, “well, it’s a Trump issue.” No. That’s the reality that’s the systemic nature of the international system.

 

AM: And one of the things that the United States has absolutely not done is use the United States Dollar as a weapon to combat that. But that’s a whole different topic and we can get all sidetracked on that one but…

 

TN: Yeah, we can spend a lot of time on that. Here’s a question from @RemaniSrikanth: How much is China policy hinged on who wins the U.S. election? Do you believe that fundamentally the democrats and republicans would have different China policies?

 

CB: After the Russian debacle that they had in the Obama administration and the people that came out of that, I would be surprised if they did like a complete reset, okay? I don’t think democrats really have any real agreement about what they want to do with China. Even within people within the Biden administration or what would supposedly be a Biden administration. You have people that are people that honestly I think would be, if they weren’t democrats, would probably fit well within a Trump administration and you have people that would practically be German in their approach in that there’s no concession. You’ve heard things about well they want to focus on climate change and this 2060 promise is great. We have something to go with here. I don’t think anybody really has a good idea.

 

My own personal suspicion would be more than anything the Trump administration has actually been very deliberate in turning up continuing generally speaking across policy domains and turning up continuing to turn up the pressure slowly, like a pressure cooker. I don’t think you would see that under Biden administration. I don’t think necessarily you would see a rollback of most Trump policies.

 

TN: Albert, do you agree?

 

AM: Yeah, I agree with Chris wholeheartedly. Xi is at a do or die moment with Trump being re-elected. If trump is re-elected and the pressure’s maintained or even raised, I do not think he lasts two or three years in there. As for a Biden presidency, what it would look like? All we have to do is go back to the track record of the Obama presidency and see what they’ve done. They just ignore whatever China does and let them run around the world and do whatever they want. We sat there for two years in 2013 watching China militarize islands while there was absolutely no response. Having Samantha Power back, Valerie Jarrett, Susan Rice doesn’t give me any confidence whatsoever into dealing with dealing with the Chinese.

 

TN: I was in Asia during that time jumping up and down and was told that I was overly aggressive so I share your frustration. Here’s a question from @JamesRoberta7: What does a Xi Jinping and China situation look like if Trump is elected and Pompeo stays at state? What does that look like the first say 24 months of of that type of situation?

 

AM: It really depends on the actions of the Trump administration. Do they ramp up tariffs again? Do they start pressuring them in China? Do they pressure them in Vietnam, in the Philippines? I think they do.

 

The Chinese are going to have to respond to safeguard their own interests. What do they do? Maybe cause a skirmish with the Indians again. Threaten the Taiwanese a little bit more. They can’t really act militarily. They just don’t have the capacity to do that and they’d be completely embarrassed. That’s a whole different argument to itself but like I said, the days are numbered, if Trump is reelected, for Xi. I don’t think the elite families within the Guangdong province would put up with further losses of their wealth.

 

TN: I think that’s something that’s lost on a lot of the American analysts. There is not a monolithic kind of Chinese Communist Party. There are facts within the CCP. There are different power centers. A lot of even the think tankers in America act as if there is this single head at the CCP. He has definitely solidified some power but there are still some very powerful factions. Chris, what do you think about that if there’s a kind of a Trump-Pompeo, that partnership continues, what do you think that looks like for China and the CCP?

 

CB: So, I’m going to slightly diverge from from Albert here in that what we’ve basically seen in the first four years of Trump, especially in the past two years is that Trump is taking a lot of things that are well within the executive purview that he can do. Whether that’s sanctions of different kinds. Although you know in a way the amount of pain that he can cause China within that basket of tools is at this point, it’s increasingly limited. In different ways probably, the biggest thing that he could do is do something that really blocked like IPO or really crimped dollar access.

 

Crimp dollar access is an enormous weapon. But I think the next step is, and you’re actually seeing a lot of groundwork being laid is and you just saw for instance some comments out of India where the U.S. state department is talking about really ramping up its alliance with India. And you’re starting to see a lot of these very foundational type of stuff. So whether it’s increased congressional spending to military things, alliances, different stuff like that, that would be likely where you would see a lot of the focus, especially, legislatively to get authorization to do those types of activities.

 

TN: Okay, that’s a great point as you bring up India to ask this question from @dogthecynic: “How durable do you think the China-Russian alliance is?” And I bring that up because India and Russia traditionally have had a strong alliance post-war. If the U.S. and India continue to get closer at some point, will Russia have to choose between China and India as an ally? Is that even a choice? Let’s start with how strong is that China-Russia alliance? Is it just a resources for weapons type of alliance or is it really a tighter alliance?

 

AM: If you look at it historically, it’s nothing more than cyclical friends with benefits, if you want to call it that. It comes and goes. Their interests are aligned in one area, they conflict on another. Right now, they’re conflicting in Africa quite a lot more than people understand. The Indians, they’ve used Russia as a counter balance to the to the Chinese for decades. It’s quite clear.

 

I don’t think the Chinese and the Russians trust each other. They never will. The Chinese have been encroaching on their borders. Is it strong? No. Can India-U.S. alliance possibly tip it more in their favor? I really don’t think so. I don’t think the Indians are ignorant to the fact that they need Russia as a counterbalance just as much as they need the United States security blanket.

 

CB: The way I would phrase it is that there is what is the honor among thieves. They clearly are frenemies. The Russians know that China is stealing plane designs and engine designs and all this kind of good stuff at the same time, Huawei is working with Russia to hire local hackers and setting up things in Russia to engage in cyber warfare and whatnot because they have a very common enemy. As long as there’s a common enemy for them to focus on and it benefits them to fight that common enemy, I think absolutely that partnership is at least to a plausible degree is going to exist for the sake of the kids, for lack of a better term.

 

TN: Okay, I’ve got some very similar questions from @gabrielfox1 @jschwartz91 and @americacapitalone about Taiwan. So China, Taiwan, U.S. pretty delicate relationships and a lot of the questions are really about the kinetic conflict but also the business aspect of China-Taiwan relations and increasingly Taiwan-U.S. relations with some of the semiconductor activity that the U.S. has undertaken against China. So can you open that up a little bit for us?

 

First of all do you think a China-Taiwan conflict in the next say 24 months is more than say 30% possible? Which it’s just a hedge right? I mean is it realistically possible? That’s kind of a yes or no. But do you think there will be more difficult commercial relationships between China and Taiwan or do you think this is just something that is kind of window dressing and they need each other?

 

AM: Do I think there’s a conflict brewing in the next 24 months? Absolutely not. I don’t think the Chinese have the capabilities. I don’t think they want to be embarrassed furthermore. The Chinese elite, they have money wrapped up in Taiwan. They’re not going to sit there and cut off their their money supply just because Xi wants to prove a point that I don’t believe they can win a war quickly. It would hurt.

 

CB: I will disagree with with Albert here. My understanding of the military capabilities actually align with Albert and what the people I trust have basically said, it’s really going to be 2022, 2023 before they probably have the capabilities necessary.

 

Albert said something very interesting, which I think is worth repeating. They don’t want to be embarrassed. Well let’s look at how China’s behaved in the past year, okay? I don’t think you can project that level of rationality on Xi Jinping. Why the hell are they fighting over some frozen tundra in the Himalayas? It logically makes zero sense, right? I’m not saying that there’s going to be a war. It could be some type of low-level conflict. There’s a lot of different ways that it could be. This doesn’t necessarily mean full-scale invasion
but I would definitely put some type of event conflict distinctly higher.

 

TN: I think it’s unlikely but given my exposure to mid-levels of Chinese ministries they are not the rational, thoughtful, wise organizations that many Americans think and Xi Jinping as you say Chris, why are you fighting over some icy hills in northern India? It’s just stupid, right?

 

So I don’t believe the Chinese government is as thoughtful and wise as many westerners suspect. They make stupid mistakes like everyone else. I’m not saying they’re more stupid than anyone else. I think they’re just as they’re human beings.

 

Now let’s move along a little bit more into economics and talk about the Belt and Road initiative, which something that I actually worked on for about a year and a half. There’s been some talk in the last few months about the anglosphere and does the west have an answer to the BRI? This is really aN eight-year-old question, but my first question is, does the U.S. need a response to the BRI as a government initiative and if so do you think they can do it?

Categories
Podcasts

BBC Business Matters: President Trump announces new US sanctions on Iran

Tony Nash joins Fergus Nicoll at the BBC for Business Matters podcast where they discussed about US sanctions on Iran, the battle for the new head of World Trade Organization, Texas’s stand on green technology, and the coronavirus update right in Houston, Texas.

 

This podcast was published on October 9, 2020 and the original source can be found at https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/w172x18z44jxg52

 

BBC Business Matters Description:

 

The US has imposed sweeping new sanctions on Iran, this time targeting its major banks as the Trump administration continues its strategy of “maximum pressure.” We’ll hear from Barbara Slavin, Director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council. Also in the programme, the selection of a new director general of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) is entering its final stage and with both the final candidates being female, whoever gets it, it will be the first time the job has been taken by a woman. We’ll hear from Annamie Paul, the new leader of the Green Party of Canada on her vision for how the economy can be overhauled to create sustainable jobs. And we’ll hear from one entrepreneur who has taken the pod-serving idea of coffee machines like Nespresso, and used it to serve different kinds of whiskey.

 

All through the show we’ll be joined by financial professional Jessica Khine in Malaysia and Complete Intelligence economist Tony Nash in Texas.

 

Show Notes

 

FN: On US sanctions on Iran: it’s damned if you do and damned if you don’t, I guess at this kind of fervid election time, you’ve got to have a foreign policy and yet you get a slamming if it comes up at what looks like a cynical moment.

 

TN: I just want to clarify something that your guest said. The U.S. Treasury Department made a specific statement about agriculture, food, medicine and medical devices and said that they specifically don’t apply to those commodities. This applies to 11 Iranian banks. The U.S. is working on peace agreements across the region. They’re working on withdrawing troops from Afghanistan by the end of the year. Saying that this is whipping up disagreement in the region, I actually don’t think is the case. The U.S. is proving with the actions that it’s really going to great lengths to bring peace to the region.

 

FN: So you would say presumably that when we heard Barbara say that Mike Pompei just kind of looking busy for busy’s sake, you’d say the State Department, Foggy Bottom is much more active, proactive.

 

TN: Well, if Mike Pompei wants to just look busy, there’s plenty of other stuff we can do. It’s not as if Iran is just something on the edge waiting to happen. There’s a lot going on with the US State Department, quite frankly, a lot more than has gone on for years.

 

As you know, I lived in Asia for 15 years. I lived in Europe for a spell before that. I’ve seen the U.S. State Department in action in these cities. Although the U.S. State Department has become quite assertive over the last two or three years, at least they’re doing something productive. There wasn’t much going on previously aside from upholding status quo, kind of rigid lines.

 

FN: OK, Tony, thanks. Great to have you with us. Now, I’m hoping are we going to bring you a first time appearance on Business Matters on the part of the financial professional? Jessica Khine’s with us from Nusajaya in southern Malaysia. Jessica, you’re hearing us okay? I know we’ve had a little bit of difficulty establishing connection. Good morning.

 

JK: Good morning, gentlemen. Glitches are over and delighted to join you.

 

FN: Well, that’s fantastic. Tell us a bit about Nusajaya. I had to admit I had to look it up, but it looks to me about perfect for commuting over the strait to Singapore.

 

JK: Yes. That is provided that the pandemic does not frighten the two governments, Singapore and Malaysia. And once upon a time, I was able to pop into my car, drive down with a special cash card to pay the Singapore Transport Authority as I crossed the causeway, you know, quickly flashed my passport at both customs and Immigration and pop into a meeting in the central business district in Singapore. But sadly, that has now been prevented and forbidden since March the 18th. And if you think that today where, you know, October the 9th in Asia, it has been an absolute business killer.

 

FN: In what sense? A business killer?

 

JK: No physical driving over a causeway for a meeting with a client, an institution, you know, a lunch with a friend. It’s quite frustrating to be a mere 10 kilometers north of Singapore. Tony, you have your Asian experience. I don’t know if you ever knew that the tip of southern Malaysia was so close to Singapore.

 

TN: Of course, I was actually in Nusajaya for one of the launch events years and years ago, and the intention was that it would be kind of a suburb to Singapore.

 

JK: Something like that, I think. Was it was it Mark Mobius who identified the state called Leisure Farmers as somewhere where, you know, the sultan had provided affordable land and wanted to have a lot of Singaporeans have a decent second weekend home?

 

TN: I’ve had a lot of friends who lived in that area and in those developments, and the plan was that they would commute into Singapore. Of course, that’s been very difficult in 2020.

 

FN: Jessica, what’s the state in Malaysia? Across Malaysia, if you look north to Kuala Lumpur, what is the state of the domestic fight against coronavirus? Because I’ve seen a spike in the last week or so, I think.

 

JK: Yes, indeed. They badly calculated the outcome after holding some elections in the state of Sabah, which you might know is to the east of the of peninsular Malaysia. And I think where you have a lot of people congregating together, insufficient ventilation. I actually even found out that a particular NGO had lured Sabah citizens to fly back by subsidizing their flight tickets, saying, come on, come back and vote for us, etc.. So that was slightly poorly planned. Numbers of new cases which had been, you know, a very proud single digit for a thirty four point six million population nation, suddenly got catapulted right up into 600, 400, 300. And it’s quite a sort of a, you know, quote unquote horror movie situation at the moment.

 

FN: Go on, finish that. And then just tell us quickly whether there’s been an impact within Malaysia on business and the way people travel around to do business.

 

JK: I think the complete lockdown in the first quarter was grim. And now interstate travel is not banned. But is business choked? Absolutely. And I think, you know, it’s such a global pattern that, you know, I couldn’t beg to differ in any way. But I think we we are already aware that many governments have not been able to implement, you know, the best policy. And the continuing discussion does seem to be, do we sacrifice growth or do we pander to the the virus?

 

And and it’s, you know, unique, unique nature.

 

FN: And a quick word. Bring us up to date. And in Texas, Tony, how do things stand since we last spoke?

 

TN: I think they stand pretty well. The governor here just started to lift even more restrictions here. We’re in the top five states in terms of the the lowest R0 contagion rate in the U.S. It’s very low here. We may hear case numbers, but the hospitalization and casualty numbers are very, very low here. So things here seem to be getting much, much better and have done so over the past six to eight weeks very much. And so it’s getting better. I just hope things move on.

 

FN: Tony Nash on Texas of course, you know, massively organized around the petroleum industries. What is the tolerance or or interest in Green Party as such a green new deal as such in Texas?

 

TN: I’m in Houston. It’s not very high at all. Obviously, that endangers a lot of jobs here. What’s happening in Canada is slightly different with the Tarzans and the cost of getting crude out of the ground there versus shale in west Texas, which is cheap on a relative basis. We produce much less expensive from a cost perspective, hydrocarbons in Texas. In parts of Canada, you have to have crude trading at relatively high levels for it to be economical. I can understand why it would be more interesting there. Here in Texas, we get out of the ground a lot cheaper. So it makes kind of less sense here.

 

FN: We’ve got to go to a break in a moment, Tony, but what’s been the impact. Has the coronavirus shut down earlier in the year? What happened with with fracking and so on in Texas?

 

TN: Coronavirus is one blow, but what we had about three or four weeks before coronavirus was, if you remember, the Saudis and the Russians did an OPEC deal where they really crushed the price of crude. The crude markets were oversaturated on the supply side and the price was down already. And then we had a second blow with a coronavirus. The oil and gas sector is really damaged this year, not only because of COVID, but also because of what the Russians and the Saudis did to prepare crude markets for this, meaning oversupply in a market where demand just evaporated.

 

FN: Tony, how on earth do you pick between two talented, experienced, clever people of this in a competition of this kind?

 

TN: Yeah, they’re both great. I think we have a trade expert against a reformer expert. And I think the question really is, what does the WTO need right now? Do they need trade expertise or do they need reform? Given that Azevêdo regime at Servicio has been pretty lackluster and so well, I would love to see an Asian head at the WTO. At this point, a reform is much more important because issues like nontariff barriers continue to allow countries to circumvent trade rules. And until there is reform to actually track and name the names of that stuff, we’re going to continue to see massive problems in trade.

 

FN: Will come to Jessica in a moment on that desire for an Asian head of the organization. But, Tony, just amplify that point about reform, because both candidates use that word. Everybody says the WTO is seriously wanting. But what are the most egregious problems and who’s standing in the way of this reform?

 

TN: I think it’s an institutional problem more than an individual problem. What is it? I think it’s the ability for countries to try to circumvent the rules. The WTO hasn’t necessarily kept up with technology and kept up with trade policies and the value buildup of goods. And this is why, like in the U.S., I moved to the U.S. three years ago. I spent most of my life in Asia.

 

This is why the U.S. has done things like the USMCA to really prepare for re-regionalization of trade patterns. What we saw from 1990, 2000 until 2015 was the clustering of trade power in Northeast Asia. And that has led to a lot of concentration of risk and supply chains. What we’re seeing, especially in the wake of coronavirus, is a desire for companies and countries to de-risk their supply chains by re-regionalizing, their supply chain.

 

So in the late 80s, early 90s, we saw regionalization of supply chains with the E.U., with NAFTA and with other regional agreements. It’s only when China came into the WTO that you saw this real dash for a hard centralized concentration in Northeast Asia.

 

FN: Very interesting, Jessica. I’m not sure what whether you want to add to that. But just let’s start at least with this point about maybe it’s a myth, Asian solidarity for an Asian candidate. Would you assume that across Southeast Asia, for example, there would be enthusiasm for the candidate presented by Seoul?

 

JK: I think the important point is that just to honor someone we have recently lost Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Women belong in places where decisions are being made. So I, for one, am absolutely over the moon about the two candidates. It is true that there is some tension from China and Japan regarding a union, his candidacy. But I think that it’s time to grow up. I fully concur with Tony that, you know, in. The whole organization called WTO, I think reform is crucial, the ability to track name and shame, you know, perpetrators who are consistently breaking rules and laws and policies is absolutely important.

 

But the other the counter weight to that is that I think we’ve also got to fight this big move, which has been reinforced post pandemic of kind of globalization. Tony used the word re regionalization. But I think the supply chain issues, I think there’s whoever comes in is going to have, in a way, a sort of a poisoned chalice. There’s got to be a lot of work that’s done to clean the house. I’m delighted that its two strong candidates, but I might agree with Tony that the reformer might possibly win over the candidate with a strong color and background in trade.

 

TN: And Tony, it’s worth noting that, you know, we should probably just stop. You know, it is no longer a remarkable thing for a woman to head such an organization. We have Christine Lagarde at the ECB. We have Kristalina Georgieva, the IMF chief economist, the IMF, Gitter Gopinath, and so on. We had the former head of the Fed, of course, was a woman. So is this now normalised?

 

TN: I think it’s great that we’re in this position. But I don’t think anybody is as shocked that there are two women battling to enter the WTO. I don’t think this is the 1980s. It’s in 2020. I think it’s definitely normalize.

 

FN: These guys do Martin and their colleagues. These are the dreamers who who just turn everything over, reinvent things and and who’s who’s to who’s to quibble about that centuries old tradition, whatever these guys are doing something radical and new.

 

TN: It’s a tough hill to climb because the whiskey drinkers that I know like the tradition and they like the process. Your comment about the chemistry set was pretty apt, actually, because it’s for anybody who has a taste for any certain kind of food, it doesn’t matter what can be done super quickly. The enjoyment is in the process. It’s in the refinement and it’s in the care that it takes for that stuff to come to market.

 

FN: That’s what they say about Business Matters. Thank you very much, guys. Great pleasure. Good to have you with us, Tony, as always.

 

Categories
QuickHit Visual (Videos)

QuickHit: Permanent demand destruction in fuels markets

Patrick De Haan, Head of Petroleum Analysis at GasBuddy, joins us for this week’s QuickHit episode where he discusses the loss of demand in gasoline (petrol) and fuels markets in the wake of Covid-19. How much gasoline demand has been lost and when will it recover? How far have prices fallen – and how long will they remain low? Patrick explains the dark clouds that have formed around petroleum and when we’ll get back to a “sense of normal.”

 

GasBuddy helps motorists save at the pump by showing low gas prices across North America and down under in Australia. Patrick has been with GasBuddy for over a decade basically helping millions of users understand what goes into what they’re paying at the pump and to understand how complex issues can influence their annual fuel bill.

Follow Tony on Twitter: https://twitter.com/TonyNashNerd

Follow Patrick on Twitter: https://twitter.com/GasBuddyGuy

Check out the CI Futures platform to forecast currencies, commodities, and equity indices: https://www.completeintel.com/ci-futures/

 

***This QuickHit episode was recorded on September 16, 2020.

Last week’s QuickHit was with TankerTrackers.com co-founder Samir Madani explaining half a billion barrels of oil going to China right now.

 

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

 

Show Notes:

 

TN: I was following you particularly in the last couple of weeks going into the U.S. Labor Day weekend in early September and then coming out of it. It seemed to me that consumption going into Labor Day seems pretty strong but coming out of it seemed like things really fell off even on an annualized basis. Can you talk us through what is that telling you if anything meaningful and is that telling you anything about the recovery from COVID, the consumption recovery?

 

 

PD: We’re just entering this post-summer time of year. That we really get a good idea of where we’re going and obviously, COVID19 has really influenced every angle of what’s normal for this time of year.

 

 

What’s normal is that demand for gasoline typically drops off notably. Kids are back in school. Vacations are done. Americans are staying closer to home. But this year, a lot of what we’re seeing in the media, the current events headlines are playing into how Americans are feeling and that plays into where they go. How often they do and so all of this is really factored in and probably one of the top economic indicators of what to expect.

 

 

And so far in the week after Labor Day, we did see a nice run up to Labor Day. I think it was probably one of the best summer holidays, which gave us some glimmer of optimism. But now, we’re coming down from the sugar crash and we are starting to see demand fall off. Where we go from here? I think, we’re at a turning point. Will we see demand continue to kind of plunge or will we start to see a little bit more optimism? I think obviously a vaccine would be the holy grail. But for now, really we’re kind of looking at seasonal trends that may be enhanced by a lot of the restrictions motorists are contending with state by state.

 

 

TN: Next to my office is a commuter lot, and that commuter lot has been closed. We’re outside of Houston. So, people get on a bus to go into downtown Houston for work. That’s been closed since February. Yesterday, I noticed they’re mowing the lawn. They’re getting it ready to reopen. How much of an impact are those commuters, who are driving, who would normally use bus into a downtown? Is that having an impact on the consumption and on the demand or is it pretty marginal at this point?

 

 

PD: At this point, we’ve seen a lot of demand come back. We were at one point down 55% in March or April and basically everyone stayed home. Now we have rebounded. We’re still down about 15 to 20% compared to last year. But it’s that last 15% percent that’s probably going to take more than a year, maybe, two years to fully come back as businesses slowly reopen. That’s a really good benchmark of how quickly that last 15 percent in demand is going to take and I think at this case, it’s going to take quite a long time for people to be comfortable getting on mass transit.

 

 

I have the same thing here in Chicago. I was recently down in Northwest Indiana. There’s a lot of commuters that come up from Indiana during the day. And again a massive parking lot satellite imagery shows that parking lot filled for the last 10 years consistently, suddenly it’s empty. Some of the big businesses, they’re not really talking about getting a lot of people back into the offices by the end of the year. All the focus really is going to be on early next year or if there’s a major disruption like a vaccine that would cause businesses to move their timelines up. But for now, when it comes to gasoline, distillates even jet fuel, it looks rather bleak.

 

 

TN: Yeah, I think so and I think we’re getting to that point of the year. Even if there was a vaccine tomorrow, I don’t know if people would necessarily call everyone back before the end of the year. It just seems like we’re getting into a really awkward time where it’s hard to tell people to come back. Is that the sense you get as well? I mean JP Morgan aside, right? You know, they’ve called everyone back on September 21st but do you see, are you seeing much activity around other people heading back into the office?

 

 

PD: Not a whole lot. It’s really interesting actually. I was talking to my wife this morning, who does investment bacon and she said that some of the JP Morgan traders had been called back earlier only to be now sent back home because of a coronavirus in the office. That’s kind of the risk that businesses are taking here. That’s why it’s going to take a while for us to get that confidence back to go in offices.

 

 

Now even more so than ever, businesses are becoming accustomed to this new era and telecommuting is likely to really surge. That could mean a permanent demand destruction of at least 5% maybe even more than that. Maybe we don’t get 10% of demand back and it takes years for us to start building up our confidence to get back on planes, to get back on trains and that’s where the dark clouds are forming for petroleum is that the longer we remain in this era, the longer it’s going to take us to get that confidence back to go back to some sort of sense of normal.

 

 

TN: Since you focus on gas prices, petrol prices. What does that do if we don’t recover that 10% in commuter consumption or driver consumption? Putting even the jet fuel stuff aside. What does that do for overall gasoline pricing in the U.S.? Are we at a kind of a step lower than we’ve normally been or do we still see say intermittent seasonal volatility where we go up to normal prices? What does that look like for the average consumer?

 

 

PD: I think it was back in 2015 at some point when OPEC opened the Spigot up and oil prices were low. We all had this phrase “it was lower for longer.” That’s a phrase that may be in a different use here but that’s what we may be looking at for both gasoline and distillate prices lower for longer because of this very slow return of demand. And so I foresee that gasoline prices will struggle for quite some time. Maybe, a period of years to get kind of back into where they normally would go and it’s because of this demand destruction that could stick around. I think most of this winter motorists will be looking at prices under $2 a gallon. Of course barring the traditional high-taxed, high-priced states like California and Hawaii where the sun is shining and unfortunately right now they have a lot of forest fires but for everyone else it’s going to be a sub $2 gallon winter. Next summer is probably going to be another good one. But the future next summer does get a little murky if we do get some demand back. Keep in mind that we’re making a lot of permanent decisions today on the era wherein that is oil production has been shut down, drilling is offline, even some refineries in Europe are shutting down. And if we do get some sort of bounce, that could lead these shutdowns today, could lead to higher prices whenever we do turn that corner.

 

 

TN: Just for context when you say sub $2 a gallon? How much is that off of normal prices? What are normal prices? Is it 2.53 dollars?

 

 

PD: It typically is in the last few years we’ve held remarkably stable somewhere in the mid to upper two dollar gallon range nationally. So, very, very rarely with the exception of I believe early 2016 and early 2015 have we seen the national average spend a considerable amount of time under two dollars.

 

 

TN: So you’re saying 30% off of what had been traditionally normal prices? Is that fair to say for the next maybe 12 months or something?

 

 

PD: Yeah, I think six to 12 months and potentially beyond that and the amazing thing about those prices is before this, that would entice motors to hit the road. Now, it’s not really doing a whole lot.

 

 

TN: If gasoline prices are 30% off of normal but commuting is down these sorts of things. Is there an upside? What are you telling your clients about this?

 

 

PD: The upside here potentially and my clients at GasBuddy members so we’re looking at this a little bit differently. Is that low prices probably here to stick around? I think given the situation, low prices will actually keep America using more petroleum than the early era 2014, 2013 when motorists were really looking at Prius’s, EVs. I think that’s going to really slow down given the environment of low prices kind of incentivizing motorists not to ditch their fossil fuel cars at this point.

Categories
QuickHit Visual (Videos)

QuickHit: “Perceived Recovery” and the Artificial Market

Political economic consultant Albert Marko joins us for this week’s QuickHit episode where he explained about this “perceived recovery” and how this artificial boost in markets help the economy. He also shares his views on the 2020 US Presidential Election and the chance of Trump winning or losing this year. What will happen if his scenario plays out, particularly to the Dollar, Euro, and others?

 

Albert Marko advises congressional members and some financial firms on how the machinations of what D.C. does and how money flows from the Fed, Treasury or Congress out to the real world. He is also the co-founder and COO of Favore Media Group.

 

This QuickHit episode was recorded on August 25, 2020.

 

Last week’s QuickHit was with independent trading expert Tracy Shuchart on the end of “buy everything” market and the unknowns and apprehensions.

 

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

 

Show Notes

 

TN: We’ve seen a lot of intervention in markets from the Fed and the Treasury. I’d really love to hear what you’ve seen and what your assessment is of that activity.

 

AM: First off, we have to understand that politics and economics are tied to the head. You can’t deviate from the two of them. I don’t like when people try to disassociate the two from that. The Fed and the Treasury had to work on financial stability of the markets. That is the ground game right now. The only way to do such a thing would be to congregate all the market makers and select certain equities and pump those equities until the market had a perceived recovery at that point.

 

TN: So perceived recovery, that’s an interesting, interesting word. When you say market makers or strategists got together and plan this, what concentrations have you seen in markets? Is it possible to focus on a specific number of companies and make sure that the rest of the market moves based on their coattails?

 

AM: Of course. This is not a new strategy. We’ve done this in 1907, and done this in nineteen eighty seven with Buffett and Goldman and we’re doing it now. It’s just the way it is.

 

The way the strategy works is you take a couple equities, say a dozen of them, maybe a little bit less. Tesla would be one. Nvidia, Adobe, all of these companies that don’t really have international peers to compare with and valuations that they can pump and the market takes over and comes up with all sorts of fancy ideas of why Tesla is at a $400 billion valuation.

 

But the fact of the matter is, if you look at the pricing and you look at all the call options that have happened over the last four months, it’s pretty clear that this was completely done artificially.

 

TN: It seems the US markets lead global equities. Is there some linking of this? And again, are there international coattails that follow on to US equities coattails or is that what you’ve seen in recent months?

 

AM: That is absolutely correct. There are a couple of markets that would support the US market specifically. That obviously would be the U.K. But the one I like to look at is the Swiss National Bank. They have their minions and their people intertwined within US hedge funds and working with the Fed and the Treasury for years. So if something is going on, they would probably be the next people to hear about it. And you can actually see this by looking at their portfolio buys in Q1 and Q2, as opposed to the 2018. You’ll see that those certain equities like Apple and Tesla had just gotten ridiculous amount of eyes.

 

TN: How successful is that been? As we look at the depths of the pullback in April? Crude oil was at negative $37 in April and it fell $99 from January through April. WTI did at least, right? Equities obviously had a lot of problems. So from your perspective, how has that been executed? How has it been pulled off? Is it okay? Is it good? Are we seeing, at least in equity markets, are we seeing a “V” and do you think that translates into the real economy whatever that is?

 

AM: I use the word “perceived recovery” before as this is artificial. It does support the markets. They’ve done exactly what the Fed was mandated for financial stability. Loretta Mester says that quite often in her speeches. In that respect, yes, they absolutely stabilize the market. Now comes the challenge of rotating out into value stocks and the actual financials or retail or something that’ll actually create jobs later on. They’re going to have to do that. But again, this is basically to stabilize not only the markets, but also the political class that’s supporting it.

 

TN: When you talk about the political class… We’re in the middle of an election cycle. This is my first election to be back in the US since the first Bush election. I was overseas for a long time. So I’m seeing things I haven’t had a front row seat to for a long, long time. How does all the things we’ve been talking about with supporting markets and and really having this kind of quasi recovery, how does that segue into the election? How do you see the election playing out?

 

AM: The people that are in charge now are appointed by the political class in charge at the moment. So those two are going to protect themselves at all costs. Trump appointing Mnuchin. Mnuchin doing what he has to do for financial stability. Now we’re looking at Trump ”losing in the polls” — highly questionable when you look at the methodology about those polls. Right now, I would have Trump winning — about a 60 percent chance at the moment.

 

TN: But the president isn’t the only office, right? So do you have an opinion on the Senate and the House as well? Do you think we’re going to see a flip in either of those places?

 

AM: No, I think the Republicans will actually take back anywhere between eight and 10 seats in the House and they’ll lose possibly two, maybe three seats in the Senate. So they’ll still control the Senate, although that’s when the political calculations come into work where one senator, two senators can block an entire policy of the president. Trump is going to have to do more executive orders going forward, which I personally don’t like, and nobody really should actually advocate for that. But this is the time that we live in.

 

TN: If your scenario plays out, how does that impact US foreign policy for the next four years? What do you see is the major… I would say trade was a big issue in the first four years of Trump, right? And bringing China to the four was one of the big issues. What would you say would be the big foreign policy issues under a second Trump administration if it comes to pass?

 

AM: The big one is China. China is quite intelligent. They hire former congressional members to go and talk politics so they understand how it works. They’re going to start hedging their bets. If they see that Trump is possibly going to win, Phase One Agriculture deals will be flying. They’ll make some concessions on intellectual property rights and whatnot. So you’ll see some of that happening from China.

 

The Europeans are absolutely in denial of what can actually happen if Trump gets elected. The only reason I see the Euro at these levels is because they’re on vacation and the US has just negative news pounding us day in and day out with the Dollar dropping to the low 90s. But I don’t see that sticking around. I think that as soon as Trump gets re-elected, I think the dollar’s back up north of 97.

 

TN: I think you’re right. I think that’s feasible.

 

Well, thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate this. Obviously you have a lot going on and you have a lot of information. This is hugely valuable for us. So I’d like to check in maybe before the election, maybe after the election so that we can do an assessment of how would the changes, whether it’s Biden or Trump, how does it impact markets and how does it impact geopolitics? That would be a fascinating discussion. So thanks for your time. Really appreciate it.

 

AM: Thank you. Thank you, Tony.

Categories
QuickHit Visual (Videos)

QuickHit: Market unknowns and apprehensions

A returning guest joins us for another QuickHit talking about how the current market unknowns are affecting the economy, and what are these “unknowns” anyway? Independent trader Tracy Shuchart discusses with Tony Nash about the “buy-everything” market and why is it happening despite the worries and crashes of economies because of COVID. We’ve also looked at the crude oil market and whether it will recover or not and how? She also shares what she thinks about the regionalization and shifts in supply chain.

 

Tracy Shuchart is a trader portfolio manager and all-around high-profile, social media person on markets. We did the first two QuickHit episodes with her with the recent one on “Oil companies will either shut-in or cut back, layoffs not done yet“ last May.

 

 

This QuickHit episode was recorded on August 14, 2020.

 

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

 

Show Notes

TN: It feels like the markets have taken a breather this week. Is that what you’re seeing and also what are we waiting for?

 

TS: You notice all this entire summer, actually, that it’s been a buy-everything market. Bonds are up, equities are up, gold’s up, crude oil’s up, across the board, everything was up. Commodities, equities, fixed income, and then just starting in August about a week, week and a half ago, we started seeing some of that error let out of those sales.

 

Equities are still grinding higher but gold futures reached 2,089 dollars, and then came off to 200 dollars really quickly. It has stalled out over the last couple of days.

 

Crude oil in general, this summer has been stuck in a range. So, I guess you could say OPEC did their job. They wanted to stabilize the oil market. They did that.

 

Then this week we’ve seen some of the air come out of bonds. So I think, right now, it was kind of buy-everything. We had all this government stimulus, we had central bank stimulus and now we’re at the point where the government stimulus is out. The extra unemployment, PPP loans, there’s no more checks things like that. And then we have the election come up. The markets are waiting to see what’s going to happen.

 

 

TN: And RobinHood closed their api. So, we don’t know what the Robinhood traders are doing anymore.

 

 

TS: Yeah, so it just seems like there’s a lot of things that are unknown. If you look at the vix curve structure you see the kink in that November area. So, the markets are forward looking at that as an unknown. So, these next couple months might be either going to be flat until we find out or it’s going to get really volatile.

 

 

TN: Right, the one that really told me that we are in a pause is when gold turned around. When we started to see gold turning around and we’ve seen it paused where it is now, that’s really what showed me that things have changed or things have at least slowed down. And so, are we waiting for clarity around stimulus? Because I don’t think it’s earnings or anything like that that we’re looking for. It really does, as you said, kind of a stimulus-driven market. Is that really the next thing that we’re looking for?

 

TS: I think it’s a combination of things. Fed purchases have curtailed a tiny bit. We still have an unknown about what’s going to happen and congress just adjourned for recess without a decision. So, we won’t find out what a decision is really probably until September. That leaves a whole unknown, especially, when you’re talking about that extra unemployment.

 

The big thing is the election because we don’t know what the market’s going to do. If there’s a Biden win, that will only be a sector rotation in my opinion, because of what their agenda is. Everybody’s just very apprehensive right now. They are pulling back on, their involvement in the market being that there are a lot of big unknown factors out there right now.

 

TN: It’s really one of the only recessions where incomes have actually grown during the recession, which is weird. We’ve seen retail sales and industrial production in recent months come in and they’re actually okay. It seems like the breaks are put on that with stimulus stopped as well. The question really about being stagnant or rising? Or is there a possibility that we tip over and start to decline if stimulus isn’t forthcoming by the end of August or early September?

 

TS: That’s a possibility that we see a pullback in the markets absolutely. I don’t think you’re going to see anything, like we saw obviously back in February. But I could definitely see a market pull back just on people’s apprehensions of the unknown.

 

TN: As you mentioned OPEC and that crude oil has settled and it’s been horizontal for the past couple months. What would move that either way? Do you see airlines coming back online? Do you see major events happening that would really push the oil price up? Or do you think we’re just also in a waiting pattern there?

 

TS: We’re in a waiting pattern. But from what I’m seeing, the fundamentals are improving. Even though people don’t really want to see that. I look at driving patterns not only in the States but driving patterns in the world. I look at airlines and things of that nature and we are seeing a slight improvement. Everybody’s looking for a big crash in oil prices again but I don’t foresee that at this point. Unless, obviously, something fundamental changes, like the whole world goes on a lockdown again or some unforeseen event happens. But right now, the crude oil market looks pretty strong. We’re still over supply but we’re working off that oversupply. Especially going forward into 2021, when that supply really starts to be worked off, then we have a Capex problem. We’re gonna have a supply problem. I can forsee the oil prices even going higher into next year. But right now, I would say we’re stable to drift higher at to the end of the year. We are hitting that soft season. But again, I don’t see the oil market really pulling back that much at this point.

 

TN: Is the back-to-school factored into your expectation of rising oil prices or would that accelerate it?

 

TS: I believe that people will be apprehensive to send their kids on a school bus. So they’ll probably be driving them to school. That’s actually oil demand positive for me.

TN: Our view is to see oil grind higher into the end of the year. As of August 1st, that was our view as well. I’m also curious about your views on the dollar. Do you see any dramatic movements either way in the dollar or are we in the low 90s for the next few months?

 

TS: The market is so oversold at this point and everyone is so leaning bearish. I wouldn’t be surprised in he next couple of months if prices don’t go lower that people start to unwind those short trades and we could see not a huge spike in the dollar. But just a general unwind of that shortness.

 

TN: Great, okay, is there anything out there that you’re seeing that’s really interesting that we should know about? It’s late summer. People are tired. They’re not really all into work. Is there anything that you’re looking at that we’re not really paying attention to?

 

TS: The lumber market. I sent out a few tweets about that. I think that’s definitely something to watch because the housing market is doing better than anticipated. However, we don’t need things like extra ten twenty thousand dollars added on housing costs for new home builds. So, that’ll put a very big strain on the market and on home builders. So that’s definitely something to watch at this point.

TN: I noticed if you go to home depot, the lumber section is empty. That’s not where home builders go, but that’s what I see as a consumer is. It’s just empty. There look to be seriously obviously. There’s demand pulled but there really seems to be some sort of supply issue there as well.

 

TS: Yeah, there’s a supply issue. A lot of the mills have been closed like they’ve been closing for the last couple of years because the demand hasn’t really been that high, well at least in British Columbia. But with this new surge, I’m hearing that tons of mills are back up and running shifts  24/7 now. Even smaller mills that you used to do little to no business are back up and running. So, I think that looking forward October, November, we should see some more supplies.

 

 

 

TN: What we’ve seen since COVID from toilet paper to meat processing to lumber is real stress put on supply chains. And from your perspective as a portfolio manager and a trader, do times like this make you concerned about the stability of the U.S. economy or do these tests make you feel like the people participating in that economy are making their supply chains more resilient? Do you think people are actually investing to make those things more resilient or do you think they’re just getting through and they’ll forget about it within a few months?

 

TS: No, we are seeing some improvement on supply chains and moving forward. There are companies that are diversifying out of China. It’s in supply chains closer to the U.S., Mexico, Latin America. This particular incident, this COVID really made people rethink and reassess things and I think we are seeing changes. It’s not easy to move supply chains obviously, right? So, it’s just going to take some time but I definitely see in the markets where companies are changing.

Categories
Visual (Videos)

CNA’s Asia First: US market pullback, less intense fear of COVID

Tony Nash joins the Asia First team again for another look at the US market pullback. What was the reason for that — is it the Biden’s VP candidate, the stimulus, or others? Also discussed were the market sentiments and what Nash thinks is lacking in the US economy right now. He also shared what Americans feel about COVID right now and what it means for businesses. Lastly, they discussed East Asia versus South Asia.

 

This video is the segment of Tony Nash from the August 12, 2020 full-length video episode, which was originally published by CNA for their Asia First show. You can find the source https://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/video-on-demand/asia-first/wed-12-aug-2020-13015722 

 

Show Notes

 

CNA: Tony Nash joins us now. He’s founder and CEO Complete Intelligence. He’s speaking to us from Houston, Texas, USA. Tony, we’re seeing this pullback in the markets overnight. I don’t know if it comes as a surprise to you. Is this the realization that the stimulus package might not be imminent. Is this who Biden has picked for a running mate or are there other factors at play here that have influenced the market?

 

TN: It’s really more about yields than anything. We’ve seen the impact of yields on precious metals. The impact on silver was most dramatic. But with equities, we saw a little bit of a pullback then. But we don’t necessarily feel like equities are in at a correction point at the moment. It might be some political news on Joe Biden’s VP candidate but I don’t necessarily see that being a disappointment. I don’t think there were huge expectations there.

 

There isn’t big COVID news in the U.S. There’s not necessarily major China news outside of the Alex Azar’s visit to Taiwan and the Hong Kong stuff, but there isn’t huge market impact on that. So really, it’s about yields and it’s about the expectation of stimulus.

 

CNA: Right, how much further downside do you see for the markets then?

 

TN: In the U.S., we think markets are fairly healthy assuming stimulus is coming. Now, U.S. legislators have gone for the rest of the summer. But there’s really nothing keeping Trump from issuing more stimulus like what he did over the weekend. I mean, there are things legally but he’s issued an executive order over the weekend to do that and it was a fair bit of stimulus coming down the pike.

 

What’s missing is stimulus for small and mid-sized businesses, which we had in May, June, but that really dried up at the end of July. So, we’ve seen almost 200,000 small businesses close in the U.S..

 

Really the question is, will there be more stimulus there in terms of cash flow to help the demand issues that small and medium-sized businesses are seeing in the U.S.? One of the key things that we’re finding, over the last week we’ve seen a lot of clarity come around whether American kids will go back to school at the end of August or in September. We’re seeing more and more school districts coming online saying yes they want kids back in school. Many of them in person some of them virtually but that helps American workers get back into the office as needed and where needed and gives them focus. So I would expect productivity to improve quite a lot in Q3 as parents and kids are back in school and many of them are back there physically.

 

CNA: But the case counts in the country. I mean, that certainly is weighing on sentiment is it not? And you know the idea that the country hasn’t quite got a hold on it, there is a possibility that they will have to start, stop the economy and it’s not as straightforward as going ahead with those lockdowns. When you do it a second, third time, that’s just going to have this permanent damage to the U.S. economy?

 

TN: Sure, that’s right. But I think the focus in the U.S. has really gone away from case counts. People are really looking at mortality. They’re really looking at clusters. They’re really looking at transmissibility. And so, I think in the U.S., the sentiment and the desire to close down. Generally, people are kind of over it. The fear of COVID is not as intense as it was two months ago. People realize that it’s a disease, it’s a virus. It comes and goes. The incidence rate and the death rate is actually fairly low.

 

The U.S. has done tens of millions of tests and so people are realizing that the high case counts are very related to the tests and this is going out through a lot of different mechanisms at the state level and the national level in the US. It’s not to say it’s gone. It’s not to say that we have zero cases. But a lot of countries in a lot of locations that say they have zero cases. I’m not necessarily sure that the testing is being done as thoroughly as it could be.

 

CNA: All right we’re also seeing that improvement of economic indicators in the Asian region, industrial output, some export figures look like they are on the uptrend in China for example. How much of this is going to be a divergent play east Asia versus south Asia for example?

 

TN: We really see east Asia lagging, although the Chinese data like the auto data that came in yesterday it looks okay. On year on year basis it looks pretty good. But I’m not necessarily convinced that that’s sustainable, given the demand issues that we saw in the first half of the year. There are ongoing worries that we’ll see issues in China’s economy and political issues in China with Hong Kong and other places.

 

We’re expecting east Asian markets to really not do well this month. We’ve expected kind of more than a one percent decline this month in east asian markets generally between say one and three percent based on the market in south Asia because they’re less China connected. We expect them to be flat to slightly down. So,  this month generally we’re expecting a slight pullback in Asia but south Asia fares a bit better than east Asia, although it’s not that dramatic.

 

Categories
QuickHit Visual (Videos)

QuickHit: China is not going to stop being China

Panama Canal Authority’s Silvia Fernandez de Marucci joins us for this week’s QuickHit, where explains why China is not going to stop being China. She also shares first-hand observation on the global trade trends — is it declining and by how much, what’s happening in cruises and cargo vessels, where do gas and oil shipments are redirecting, why June was worse than May, and what about July? She also shares the “star” in this pandemic and whether there’s a noticeable regionalization changes from Asia to Europe, and when can we see it happening? Also, what does Panama Canal do to be up-to-date with technology and to adapt the new normal?

 

Silvia is the Canal’s manager of market analysis and customer relations. She has 20 years of experience studying all the markets for them and is responsible for their pricing strategy, their forecasting of traffic and customer relations.

 

Panama Canal opened in 1914 with annual traffic of 14,702 vessels in 2008. By 2012, more than 815,000 vessels had passed through the canal. It takes 11.38 hours to pass through it. The American Society of Civil Engineers has ranked the Panama Canal one of the seven wonders of the modern world.

 

***This video was recorded on July 30, 2020 CDT.

 

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

 

Show Notes

 

 

TN: Recently, the CPB of the Netherlands came out and said that world trade was down by double digits for the first five months of the year. Obviously that’s related to COVID. Can you tell us a little bit about what you’ve seen at the Canal and really what you guys have been doing? Everyone’s been in reactionary mode. So what have you seen happening in the market?

 

SM: There are some trends that had been present before COVID like the movement of production from China to Eastern Asia and we think this is going to be accelerated by this pandemia. But I don’t think that China is going to stop being China. It will keep the relevance and the importance in global trade as they have today.

 

We think that probably, yes, we will see more regionalization. We saw the signing of the renewal of the NAFTA trade between Canada, the US, and Mexico. So we think that there may be something happening in that area. However, we don’t see that trade is going to stop. I mean trade is going to continue growing after this pandemic.

 

This is something that I would say very different from anything that we have experienced before because once it is solved, I don’t know if the vaccine appears and people start going back to the new normal, there will be changes probably to the way we do things and the consumer is going to be very careful and probably will change his habits in order to prevent contagion. But I think trade is going to continue.

 

We see some of these trends becoming more and more important or at a faster pace. It is not an economic crisis per se. Once the people are going back to work, the industry will restart their operations, people are going to be rehired. The economy should start recovering faster. We are not sure because there is no certainty with this situation.

 

We first heard about it early in the year with the cases in China. But then, it looked so far away. It was happening to China. It was happening to Italy. We didn’t think about it as something that was so important or so relevant. The first casualty was the passenger vessels. The whole season for cruise ships at the Canal was cut short in March and Panama went to a total lockdown on March 25.

 

It really started for us when we received the news of a cruise ship arriving in Panama with influenza-like disease on board that wanted to cross, which was the Zaandam, and the first one that we had with the COVID patients on board.

 

TN: And how much of your traffic is cruise ships?

 

SM: It’s very small, to be honest. It’s less than two percent of our traffic. But still, we see it as an important segment, not only because of the traffic through the Canal, but also because of what it does to the local economy. We have a lot of visitors, a lot of tourism, and that is a good injection of cash coming to Panama. It was the probably the end of the season but it was shorter than what we would have wanted.

 

TN: When we saw the first wave of COVID go through Asia, did you see a a sharp decline in vessel traffic in say Feb, March? Or was it pretty even? Did we not see that much? Because I’ve spoken to people in air freight and they said it was dramatic, the fall off they saw. I would imagine in sea freight, it’s not as dramatic but did you see a fall off?

 

SM: It started in January, which is the very low season for containers, which is the most important market segments in terms of contribution to tolls. When we saw that there was this COVID happening in Chinese New Year, everything was closed. We were in a slow season. So we didn’t see much of an impact.

 

And for the Canal, there is a lagging effect because we are 23 days away in voyage terms. So whatever happens in China, we feel it probably one month later. We expected January and February to be slow because of the normal seasonality of the trade. But then after March, I would say that April was probably the worst month for us. We were hit April then May was worse than April and then June that was even worse than than May.

 

TN: June was worse than May? Okay.

 

SM: June was worse than May. We‘ve seen four percent, ten percent, fourteen or sixteen percent decline each month. It was like, “Oh wow! This is really thick. This is really getting worse.” We had reviewed our forecast in April. And I think so far, it is behaving as we expected back then. But there’s nothing written about COVID. We are learning as we go.

 

I would say that container vessels were also affected these three months of the year. We have LNG vessels that were supposed to deliver natural gas to Japan, Korea, and China. And LNG had been behaving very badly all year. That is kind of a peak season for LNG and LNG has been having a hard time because the market were supplied and the prices were very low, so many shipments that were supposed to end up in Asia, ended up in Europe or other destinations that were more profitable for the owners. But when the price of oil collapsed and went negative, the prices of LNG were affected in the Middle East and became more competitive than the US prices.

 

We saw a harsher decline in LNG shipments. We see, for example, 30 percent less than we expected to see and by COVID in April, it was probably 50 percent below what we were expecting. It was major and Iguess it’s a matter of demand because since the whole Asia was locked down, there was no demand.

 

TN: When industry stops, you don’t need energy. It’s terrible.

SM: Exactly. It’s really terrible. It was terrible. But we had some stars in our trade that supported the situation like LPG, the cooking gas and obviously people were cooking more at home so the demand was high and we saw an increase in trade for LPG. It’s a good market for us, for the neopanamax locks, so in a way we are grateful that our trade has not suffered as much as we have seen in other areas.

 

TN: You said you declined into June. How have things been in in July, so far?

 

SM: July seems promising. We came from a from a very bad June that was closed probably 16 percent below what we expected to have. But July is about maybe seven percent below our expectation. But we are very concerned about a potential W-shape recovery because of the new cases that we have seen in the US.

 

TN: When we saw factories close across Asia in the first quarter and in some cases stay until the second quarter, did you see some of the folks who were shipping through the Canal start to pivot their production to North America?

 

SM: It’s probably too early to say. We will see the effects of COVID probably in terms of near shoring maybe in two years. I don’t think that the companies or the factories are so quick as to move the production especially during this period in which everybody is still trying to cope with the situation.

 

TN: And manage their risks, right?

 

SM: Yes. So I don’t see that happening anytime soon. But it’s probably something that the factories and the companies are going to start speeding up and diversifying their production.

 

TN: And as you said earlier, China’s still going to be there. China’s not going to disappear as an origin, right? What I’ve been saying to people is it’s incremental manufacturing that may move. It’s not the mainstay of Chinese manufacturing that’s going to move or regionalize. They’re still going to do much of the commoditized manufacturing there because the infrastructure is there.The sunk cost is there, and they need to earn out the value of those factories. I like your timeline of two years before you really start to see an impact because we may see some incremental movement and maybe some very high value, high tech stuff or something like that move first but the volume of things probably won’t happen for at least two years. Is that fair to say?

 

SM: I would say so and I would add that we have seen these shifts to Vietnam and Malaysia and other countries in Asia, but we still see containerized cargo shipping from China. The volumes are still not high enough to be shipping directly from those countries. The container may come from Vietnam and or from Malaysia and they come to Shanghai or to another port in China. They consolidate the vessel there and the vessel departs from those ports. So in terms of Canal, for us that is good news. And I would say that probably Korea is trying to attract that tradition as well. So the long voyage will start in China or in Korea or in Japan instead of these other countries that are further away from our area of relevance.

 

TN: That makes a lot of sense. Just one last question. How do you see transit changing over the next five to ten years? What are you seeing from the Canal perspective in the way your operations will change?

 

SM: We are still adjusting to what is happening. We have always been very regulated in the best way. What I mean is that we have always had our protocols and codes for attending every situation. We have our protocol for infectious diseases that was the basis to start working with COVID. We think that at the canal probably, what we will see in the future is more technology to improve the operation. I’m not sure exactly how, but definitely there are machine learning and artificial intelligence that may help us be more accurate in our forecasts and probably organize our traffic in a way that is faster or we make better use of the assets. The canal is 106 years old. We have been adjusting every time to the new ways of the world, and we’ll continue to do so as a trade enabler.

 

TN: That’s right. Silvia, thank you so much for your time. This has been very insightful. I really do hope that we can connect again in some time and and just see how trade recovers and what we look like maybe going into 2021 or something like that. Okay. Thank you so much.

 

SM: Thanks to you.