US markets remained volatile and on a downward trend as inflation concerns heightened. With that, the US consumer is beginning to feel the pinch of rising food and energy prices. What then does this mean for earnings in the coming quarters and has this been priced in? Our CEO and founder, Tony Nash answers these questions.
Show Notes
WSN: BFM 89 nine is seven o’ six Thursday the 9 June. And of course you’re listening to the morning run. I Wong Shou Ning together with Philip See. Let’s have a quick recap on how good global markets closed yesterday.
PS: US markets closed in the red. The Dow was down .8% SMP 500 down 1.1%, Nasdaq down zero. 7%. Whereas over in Asia it’s been a mixed bag. The Nikki was up 1%, Hong Sang up 2.2%. China composite up zero 7%. I think on the back of China easing a bit on the tech regulatory concerns. However, in Southeast Asia, Singapore is down 0.2%. FBM KLCI also down.
WSN: .1% so for some analysis on what’s moving markets, we speak to Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. Good morning, Tony. Please help us understand what is happening in US markets because it is another red day today. Why are markets so choppy this Thursday?
TN: I think people are awaiting the CPI print what’s going to happen with the inflation announcement because that number really helps to indicate if the Fed will accelerate their plans of tightening. So if the CPI runs hot, then we’ll see them accelerate potentially. If it comes in as expected, then they’ll stick with the plan that they’ve got.
PS: So the plan is to 50 basis point hikes. If you see it move higher, are you talking about it hitting 75 or like extending it for a third 4th hike?
TN: If it’s higher, we could potentially see it hit 75 maybe in June or July. But certainly we’re looking at another hike in September that’s probable right now and then maybe a 25 basis point in November. So let’s say we saw come in at nine or something like that for a developed economy like the US. These are people who normally look at inflation, 1%, one and a half percent. So 9% inflation is just something that people have not seen for a long time. And so this is really damaging to people. Wages are not very flexible here. And so I’m sure from the Malaysian perspective, you see that it’s damaging people here in the US and it actually is because wages are not as flexible here as they are in other parts of the world. So if we see CPI come in high, then you would see the set accelerate. If it comes in at eight, let’s say less than 9%, they’ll stick with the plan they have. If it comes in lower, say seven-ish they’ll still stick with the plan they have and continue to fight inflation to get it down around 2%, maybe sometime in Q1 in 2023 or something.
WSN: Okay. So let’s stay on the topic of the US economy now. Bloomberg runs a model, runs different models actually, and they say that there’s a 25% chance of recession in the next twelve months, but a 75% chance by 2023. Do you share the same view but.
TN: A 25% chance of a recession is just a hedge. Right? I mean, that’s just saying maybe it’ll happen.
WSN: It’s a chicken call Tony. It’s like being chicken.
TN: So when you look at what a recession, two months or two quarters. Sorry. Of negative growth. Right. Well, we had a negative quarter of growth in the US, and Q one of 22. Will we have a negative quarter of growth this year? Unlikely. Or this quarter? I mean, it’s unlikely because of the reasons for negative growth in Q one are not the same reasons they would be this year or this quarter. Sorry. So going forward, I don’t necessarily think we’ll have a recession, but I think it will feel like a recession to a lot of people because over the last year, year and a half, we’ve had higher overhiring in a lot of industries like technology, overhiring where companies have been afraid they wouldn’t be able to get the talent they need. So they overhire people. They’ve paid people a lot of money. So sectors like tech will likely continue laying people off. They’ve already started, but they’ll likely reassess their wages as well as they realize that they don’t need as many people as they hired. And of course, there will be other effects if tech start laying people off more broadly. So we’ve already seen housing housing in the US.
There is effectively no new mortgage applications going through on that in the US. So the Fed’s target for housing has kind of been achieved really quickly, actually. But it doesn’t necessarily mean there’s a recession. So things will feel like there’s a recession. But I’m not sure we’ll necessarily technically be in a recession.
PS: So let’s just build on your feelings, Tony, and translate this macro numbers to earnings. What is your expectation in terms of quarter two earnings? Do you expect them to be substantially weaker and how will that translate into equity markets?
TN: Absolutely, yes. Definitely substantially weaker. I mean, look at what happened to say, Walmart and Target a couple of weeks ago when they announced their earnings, they were way down. Why? Because they had way overbought inventory and they had bought the wrong inventory. Okay. So they’re paying for that now and they’re going to have to discount to get rid of that inventory. Right. I think people in a lot of industries because of supply chain issues, they’ve overbought things. And in the meantime, preferences and markets have moved on. So they’ve overbought things and they’re going to have to get rid of a lot of inventory. I think Target and Walmart got out there very early to be able to have their equity price hit hard early. But other companies will come out in second quarter and they’ll admit the same thing. So we’ll see margins really compressed. And because of that, we’ll start to see people announce more layoffs because again, during COVID, investors were very charitable to executive teams, meaning they were telling the executive, look, just stay open, just survive as a company, do whatever you have to. Right now, we’ve got markets that are normalizing.
Investors are being more scrutinizing as they should. They’re saying, look, markets are normalizing. You have to perform like an executive team should perform. You have to perform like a company should perform. So investors and markets are going to be harder on companies in Q two.
WSN: But Tony, does this then mean that when I look at the S&P 500 index, which is probably the broadest barometer of the US economy, it’s down 13 point 65% on the year to date basis. Can we expect further weakness or has this already been priced in?
TN: I don’t think it’s been priced in necessarily. I don’t necessarily think we’re going to see another 13% down, but we always hear that things are priced in. And then when events happen, we find out they’re not priced in. I don’t think it’s priced in. I think there’s more pain to come because people are realizing that they’re basically overpaying for the price of equity. Right. In a company. And so we’re going to see pressure put on valuations, and that’s going to hurt a lot, especially in tech. So we’ve already seen pressure put on valuations in tech. And you saw companies like Facebook who are just throwing off cash still and their valuation is compressed because people have just woken up and said, look, it shouldn’t be valued at that. Right. So we’re going to see that more and more, especially in tech, but also in other sectors.
WSN: So where should we hide, Tony? Will it still be in the commodity space? I mean, oil is up 2 and a half percent this morning.
TN: At where oil is. WCI is trading at 122 right now. Brent is north of that. So it’s possible that we see another 20% rise in crude, but it’s really thin air where it is now. So I think crude price really depends on the supply side. And so can OPEC pump more? Not much. Will things in Russia resolve? Maybe probably in third quarter or something like that. Right. So we really have to look at what are central banks doing? They’re trying to ratchet down demand. Right. And so if they can successfully ratchet down demand, then that will have an impact on true prices.
PS: Tony, I would love to get your view because you’ve seen a different vantage, especially in emerging markets, particularly Southeast Asia. If you saw recently WorldBank has scaled its forecast on global growth and has even highlighted the asphalt is very much vulnerable to stack flat, even recessionary pressures. What’s your view? What’s your advantage in terms of investment in EM markets, especially in Southeast Asia?
TN: Yeah, in Southeast Asia. I mean, look, in Southeast Asia, sadly, Myanmar is going to have the toughest time for the next year or two, right? I mean, we all know the political issues there. I love Myanmar, but it’s going to continue to have the toughest time, I think of the say more developed Southeast Asian countries. I think Thailand is going to continue to have a hard time Partly because of supply chain issues. It’s kind of intermediate point and if supply chains continue to stay strained and tourism continues to be relatively slow in Asia I think Thailand is going to continue to have a tough time. I think places like Malaysia, Philippines, Vietnam, I think they’re in a better position and I don’t know that you’ll necessarily get excessive gains in those markets But I think there’s more stability and more same maturity and leadership in those markets. So if I were to look to Southeast Asia on, say, a country play, that’s where I would look. I would be really careful to look at things like excessive consumption, these sorts of things. I think for the next year or so we’re going to be looking at real stables.
What do people need to live a really boring life because we’ve had this super exciting roller coaster for the past two years and we need to get back to normal and we need to look at what are people going to consume Just to have a normal day in, day out life.
PS: Boring life then.
WSN: Yeah, boring is good.
TN: I love that. Yeah, we all need a little more of that.
WSN: Thank you so much for your time. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, saying borrowing is good, we need to get back to normality which means that what investors should be focusing on Perhaps consumer staples Versus consumer discretionary and going back to core fundamentals. Looking at valuations, I think you hit.
PS: The nail on the head core fundamentals because I think investors have given companies the past throughout the pandemic most scrutiny now whether the question will be this will show dispersion and earnings variance between those high earners and low performers Will be a big question Mark as there’s more scrutiny about how you perform in this normal, boring time.
This past week, we had a flat S&P 500. Nasdaq was up slightly. Bond yields were up slightly. It was a summer stall this week. Not a lot happening from the beginning to the end of the week. In this episode, we’re going to focus on geopolitics.
Key themes:
Is India a geopolitical trendsetter?
China, MBS & Biden – BFFs?
What does Turkey get out of halting NATO expansion?
What’s ahead for next week?
This is the 21st episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.
0:00 Start 1:36 India as a geopolitical trendsetter now? 3:55 US is frustrated with India? What’s going? 7:35 Is India being ridiculously nationalistic? 8:00 China, MBS, and Biden as BFFs? 10:08 How does MBS look at Biden with China opening up? 11:31 Awkward and Desperate: Is the US-Saudi a short-term diplomatic issue? 14:45 Is there any place they can go for energy supply? 16:00 What does Turkey get out of halting the NATA expansion? 20:20 What impacts on some countries by opening the Bosphorus. 21:22 What is DC thinking and do out of the gun discussions? 24:24 What to expect for the week ahead?
Listen to the podcast version on Spotify here:
Transcript
TN: Hi, and welcome to The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. And as always, we’re joined by Sam, Albert, and Tracy. Before we get started, could you please like and subscribe? It’s very important. But here’s what’s more important today. If you could comment on the episode, we would appreciate it. We check that stuff every week. If you disagree with us, if you think we’re full of it, let us know and let us know why. Okay.
So this week, this past week, we had a flat S&P 500. Nasdaq was up slightly. Bond yields were up slightly. Kind of a summer stall this week. Not a lot happening from beginning to end of the week. So we’re going to focus on geopolitics this week.
We’re looking at a few things. Is India a geopolitical trendsetter now? That’ll be a really interesting discussion. Second, we have China, MBS, and Biden as BFFs. So let’s see what’s there. What does Turkey get out of halting NATO expansion? Really, Turkey becoming a real geopolitical linchpin. And then we’ll have a quick chat on what we expect for the week ahead.
So first is India as a geopolitical trendsetter. India recently has halted some commodity exports. They’ve done some deals with Russia for energy, and they’ve been really independent. And India’s typically independent with foreign policy. But I’m curious if we can look at, say, the energy deals first, Tracy, can you help us understand a little bit about that, and what is India doing there?
TS: Well, I mean, absolutely. First of all, India has been complaining about oil price and saying that it’s unsustainable for them for months now, right. As we’ve been over $100. And so when they were typically not really buying anything from Russia.
However, after the Ukraine invasion, then we had that discount. The Euro to Brent discount fell to almost $40 at one point. So India started buying a lot of oil from Russia, obviously, because it’s less expensive. And they said outright energy security is more important to us right now than anything else because they are also having issues with coal. And whatnot really that’s their focus right now.
And so what we think is that likely they’ll probably become a semi permanent customer of them and probably will take in about 500,000 barrels per day going forward. So what is coming off of the European market is actually going to India and China.
TN: A lot of Westerners don’t understand that India and Russia or the former Soviet Union have had a long political ties, longtime political ties, and those long term political ties tend to come up when people need friends. There is a connection between India and Russia that a lot of Westerners don’t understand.
Albert. I guess the US tends to do this very binary. You’re with us or against us. And I would imagine that the White House and State Department, if we actually have a State Department, that they’re a little bit frustrated with India. What’s going through the US’s mind with the India relationship right now?
AM: Well, this is basically goes back to Obama, actually, with his animosity towards Modi. But the Biden, State Department and the DoD just have this naive idea of how things work in the world. India, like you said, the Russian ties with India are long standing because they use them as a counterbalance against the Chinese aggression. Right.
If you look at a map, because I always say this on Twitter, look at a map before you start talking about geopolitics. India’s surrounded by Pakistan, China, all these other proxies to China and Russia. So they can’t afford they can’t afford to sit there and poke the Hornets nest in the region because it’ll just come back at them. I mean, Pakistanika starts things in Kashmir.
The Chinese have been building mountaintop air bases to stress India over the watershed in the Himalayas. There’s so many issues that the Indians have to deal with and balance that with their Western counterparts, animosity with the dealings with Russia. It’s not that complex if you sit there and talk about it for 15 minutes. But for some reason, our State Department just can’t come to grips with that. And it’s actually causing quite the damage of the state relations of United States and India right now.
And you can talk about the Chinese component and how they stress India because they’re a major competitor in the manufacturing sector.
TN: Right.
SR: And not to mention that India has always been a very large importer of energy. And it’s a critical part of their development going forward. And they’re a 1.1 billion population. If you begin to have significant problems with energy prices and food prices, that’s a big problem for a democracy in that part of the world.
And not to mention, I think it’s somewhat hypocritical for the US government to be so mad about them buying 500,000 barrels a day when you still have Europe buying oil and gas every single day and being like, well, maybe we’ll be done by the end of the year.
TN: Right.
SR: The number of hypocrites that just keep coming out. Is India really our friend? It’s like, well, it’s Germany, it’s France, Italy.
TN: Those are valid questions.
SR: I mean, to me, it’s a little bit insincere for us to continuously be pounding on India for trying to survive as a democracy. It doesn’t make a lot of sense.
TN: Well, you conveniently overlook the fact that India regularly imports energy from Iran. Korea places like Korea regularly import energy from Iran. The State Department and White House regularly just overlook things conveniently because they want to. Right. But when it comes to Russia, for some reason, it’s a major issue.
So one quick thing I want to talk about with regard to India, and this has happened with some other Asian countries where India stopped exporting sugar and a few other commodities. We saw Indonesia stopped exporting, say, palm oil and a few other things. So this has been kind of painted as some sort of nationalistic action.
My contention has been, look, a nation state has the kind of obligation to look after their own people first. What do you guys think about that? Is India being ridiculously nationalistic by not exporting sugar and a few other things?
AM: Absolutely not. I mean, this is a case of survival, not just for India, but for multiple countries. Egypt recently, Morocco and all the other North African countries are following suit. I mean, they got to feed their own people. You can’t have your own citizens miss meals because pitchforks and torches start coming out.
TN: Yes, I think that’s a perfect way to say it. Okay, let’s move on to kind of a little bit of a crazily, delicately balanced series of relationships with China, MBS in Saudi Arabia, and Joe Biden. There’s been talk of a trip of a Biden trip to Saudi Arabia, which is a little bit awkward given the fact that MBS wouldn’t take his phone call last month. And then we’ve got China as energy importer. There are a number of levers there.
So, Sam, actually, Tracy, can you take us down that path a little bit on the energy side of what happens there and why that is so important?
TS: Well, I mean, I think it’s a thing. Relations have already been strained. Right. So I think it’s too little, too late. And second of all, to go ahead and think that Saudi Arabia or OPEC, for that matter, can lower oil prices in the US or lower gasoline prices in the US is completely misguided. We should be focusing domestically on what we can be doing here instead of banking other countries.
TN: Let me stop you right there and ask the refinery capacity is like the highest it’s been in 20 years or something, right? 92.4% or something.
TS: Yeah, it was 92.7% this week. The prior week was we were at 93.4%. So we’re pretty much at we’re cranking it out. We definitely need more refining capacity going forward. We haven’t had a major refinery built since 1977. Brownfield projects, but not real Greenfield projects.
TN: Okay. Going back to the Biden-Saudi visit, Sam, what are your thoughts on that? And if you can throw a little bit of China analysis, if China is actually opening up. How does MBS look at Biden with the potential of China opening up more aggressively?
SR: I think he looks at it as a little bit desperate. Right. And probably wants quite a bit out of doing anything. And to begin with, Sunny doesn’t have that much fair capacity. There’s not a whole lot they can do very quickly, maybe release some stocks, et cetera, but there’s not a whole lot they can do to get oil on the market quickly. And there’s a lot less that they can do to magically make diesel.
We don’t have the amount of diesel out there that we need. And we are building a refinery, and a refinery takes three to five years to build. So good luck with that. So I think it’s going to smack is a little bit desperate to MBS, and I think there’s going to be a pretty good bargaining spot for him to be in, given that China has largely shut down for a month and a half to two months, maybe reopening, and that’s going to be another tailwind to oil consumption.
And if you all of a sudden have higher oil consumption coming out of China, that’s going to be a problem for oil prices, even from $1.20, $1.15 where we’re sitting right now. That’s a tailwind that I think MBS kind of has a little bit of a grin on his face saying, hey, nothing I can do here.
TN: Right? And tell me a little bit more about the political dynamics there. Does the US and Saudi Arabia, is this kind of a short-term, say, diplomatic issue, or is it something longer term?
AM: Well, you and Sam said two key words, “awkward” and “desperate.” At the moment, Biden going to Saudi Arabia to meet with the King, which was rejected, so they’re actually pushing them off to MBS is such a black eye to the United States foreign policy. Unbelievable. I mean, at this point, you’re going to have Joe Biden go meet with MBS, who Biden’s cabinet brought up Khashoggi not too long ago, which prompted the phone call to be not even taken by the Saudi, leader of a US President. I can’t even remember when last time US President was ignored by the Saudi Arabians. I mean, it’s a disaster in the making that will probably take a good ten to 15 years to rectify.
The Saudis, what are they really going to do? A couple of hundred thousand barrels extra in a pump just to make Joe Biden happy? It’s not going to do anything. I mean, swallowed up by demand almost instantly. But when it comes to the political stuff, you have a realignment between Saudi Arabia, Russia and China happening right under our noses. And it seems to be just completely missed by the State Department of Biden administration.
SR: And to Albert’s point here, and I think it’s an extremely, extremely important point. Saudi doesn’t need the US anymore. Saudi needed the US for a while. We were their biggest customer. We are not their largest customer by a mile, and we’re unlikely to be their largest customer ever again.
So their pivot towards Asia and away from the US makes strategic sense for them. And that, to me, is an understated long term fundamental issue facing the US-Saudi relationship.
AM: That’s exactly right, Sam. And the only other component that actually contradicts that is because of the security situation between Iran and Saudi Arabia, the Saudis need US armaments, they need the relationship with Israel, and they need to re-mend relationships with Turkey. But if Russia at this point, if they’re not poking the Iranians to mess with the Saudis, there’s really no real desperate need by the Saudis for the US defense umbrella at the moment and they can just be free to sell to the Chinese, the Asians and whoever else. And remember that Biden attempted to go to Venezuela to try to get them to pump more, but then realized that while their refinery is broken down and can’t really produce anything at the moment.
SR: So the Arabians went to fix it.
TN: Yeah.
AM: There’s a lot of hypocrisy and a lot of awkward things that’s coming out of the Biden administration right now for geopolitical issues concerning the Saudis.
TN: It’s amateur hour, guys. Lincoln is a joke, often as a joke. I can’t believe it’s embarrassing where we are right now. Tracy, is there any place else they can go for supply right now?
TS: If you look at OPEC, OPEC can’t even produce what their current quote is, right? Because you have too many, too many laggards. So it doesn’t really matter. I mean, they’re 2 million barrels plus below quota last month. So it doesn’t matter if they keep raising or not. They just don’t have the spare capacity. And a lot of the smaller countries are having problems with production.
There’s nowhere else to go. Right. Especially if you’re trying to push Russia out, which is, depending on the month, the second or third largest producer. Right.
TN: Okay. And I think we can all agree that if we just buy electric cars, that would solve everything.
TS: Oh, absolutely. With the announcement that we’re going to have rolling blackouts in the Midwest this summer, I’m sure that rush right out and get EVs should help us.
TN: Right? Exactly. Okay. Let’s move on to Turkey and get really interested in the power dynamics with Turkey right now and their veto power over NATO expansion and some of their control of energy going through the Bosphorus. Turkey has really emerged as a real regional power.
I remember reading about this with George what’s his name’s book the next 100 years, reading that Turkey would be really powerful. This was a 20 year old book. Right. George Freedman. Right. And so it hasn’t happened exactly as he thought. But at the time I thought, “no, Turkey can’t reemerge.” And it’s happening right now. Right.
Albert, can you talk us through what does Turkey get out of halting NATO expansion?
AM: Well, a few things actually, quite. They really want to stop the Kurdish money system support system coming out of the Scandinavian countries because that’s where a lot of the money and support groups based themselves out of Stockholm and parts of the Baltic area. So they really want to stop that. Right. But that’s not really what they’re after because the Scandinavians put a block on their sales of arms. Right. So the Turks obviously want to sell their drones.
They want to sell some military equipment to the EU and to other players in the region. The Turks, they have a big economic problem. Right. And so they’re using every point of leverage they possibly can use. They’re trying to press the EU to give more loans, trying to stress the refugee situation, trying to stress the energy situation, trying to stress the food situation through the Bosphors. And I’ll let Sam and Tracy touch on that.
But for them right now, if you look at it like I said, with India, look at a map. Turkey right now is arguably the most geostrategic position in the entire world right now with concerns to wheat, gas, oil, refugee status. You can just pick a topic and Turkey is pretty much top five.
TN: Okay. Sam talked us through kind of from a macro perspective. What does that mean? What opportunities does that bring up?
SR: I mean, it brings leverage, right? It brings incredible amount of leverage, particularly as you begin to have Sri Lankan type issues. Go to North Africa. The easiest way for North Africa to solve its problems is for Turkey to solve the problems very quickly by opening the Bosphorus or doing something along those lines. So I think from a macro perspective, it’s really about leverage and what type of leverage they want. Right.
They actually manufacture really good, fairly cheap drones. That’s a pretty easy thing for NATO, the EU, to kind of give them a pound on the back and say, okay, yeah, go. Right. That’s something that they can actually do. And quite frankly, if you’re Sweden and Finland, guess what? You don’t really have a choice.
Turkey is going to be selling drones. Turkey is going to have some leverage on what they get to do, and you’re not going to be able to veto it or you’re going to be sitting there like a sitting duck for the next time that Putin decides he wants a little extra territory.
TN: Right. Okay.
AM: And to expand on that, Tony, the Turks, in sort of cooperation with the Iranians and the Russians, have been moving into Africa using old Ottoman trading post colonies, I mean, through West Africa, North Africa, Horn of Africa, everywhere. And there’s been absolutely no talk about it, no counteraction against it. They’re acting as if they were a major superpower with no one really putting them in their place.
TN: Well, this potentially could turn into I don’t know how much you guys know about Ottoman history 1860s, 18870s, debt load that the Turks had and the refinancing that the British and French came in to do it. And I wonder if that’s where we’ll be in five or ten years. It’s really interesting to see how that Ottoman history played through and see if that happens again with Turkey. I hope it doesn’t, because that ended up leading to World War One. But this could be really interesting.
Tracy, they opened the Bosphorus. What impact does that have on some of these countries, like Egypt and North African countries and say, Lebanon and some of these other countries that are really desperately waiting for some things out of Russia and Ukraine?
TS: Yeah. I mean, obviously that’s going to help. We’re going to get some wheat out. It looks like that is going to happen and that we are starting to see shipments flow that’s obviously going to ease tensions. Hungry people tend to revolt. So something needed to be done, in other words. And so it looks like that’s starting to happen, which is obviously a good thing.
TN: Great. Okay. I want to spring a kind of a surprise topic on you guys just really quickly. It’s a big debate in the US since we’re talking geopolitics. Guns on top of everyone’s mind. Some shootings in the States over the past few weeks.
Albert, I know, you know, DC probably better than all of us. So can you walk us through really quickly? Excuse me, what is DC thinking? What will likely happen in DC out of all of the gun discussions?
AM: Well, because it’s an election year, probably nothing. And I’ll tell you what. In politics, you cannot take a singular issue, isolate it and solve the problem. It doesn’t work like that. So, for instance, and this is something I always stress about. When you look at guns, you have to look at it as what voters intentions are and feelings are with the guns because they’re electing their members. Right.
When you have guns, they’re typically rural Americans that are religious, that have views on abortion and are farmers. Right. What’s under farmlands? Oil. So not only do you have to tackle the religious voter, the anti abortion voter, the rural farm voter, but then also big oil that actually funds all these people. So you can’t take guns alone and say, I’m going to solve it without agitating another 40 million Americans and Senate races are completely dependent on rural voters, not so much urban because that tends to go Democratic anyways. But there is actually swing cities and swing areas on top of the conservative areas that there’s a political calculation and numbers game that has to be played.
So for this year, I don’t see anything happening with guns at all. Maybe something extremely minor, but nothing that would actually be effective.
TN: For people who are non Americans, what do people outside of America not understand about the gun discussion in the US?
AM: It’s a cultural thing. The United States prides itself on being a system of checks and balances. Right. And for guns, Americans tend to think we are not going to let our government intrude and overtake us. That’s our checks and balances to dictatorships. Right. Authoritarian systems.
As other issues come up from the left and come up from the right, just everyone’s going to get more pulverized on this. There’s never going to be 100% solution. The Europeans are definitely not going to understand why Americans love their guns. But it’s just…
TN: Europeans, Australians, Asians, they don’t actually some in Asia get it.
AM: Some in Asia get it. The Swiss hilariously get it. They’re mandatory. They have Pentagon, everyone’s. And it’s unfair for the rest of the world to compare a small country of like, say, 10 million people statistically to the United States that has 350,000,000 plus people out there, the giant system.
TN: Yeah.
AM: We’re doing our best and nothing is a perfect system and we’re getting towards it. But it’ll take decades.
TN: Yes. Okay, good. I just wanted to cover that off since it’s been such a big topic lately. Okay, guys, the week ahead. We had a kind of a lackluster week this week. Tracy, what do you see happening in the week ahead? Crude actually had a fantastic week. What do you see going on next week in, say, energy and commodities?
TS: I’m still bullish energy and commodities. From a technical standpoint, we broke out of a technical pattern. Right. I don’t see anything changing, in other words, in the physical landscape, I mean, markets are tight. We have a structural deficit. The whole complex is in bacridation. So I expect energy prices to stay high. Really? I don’t think Biden’s meeting is going to do anything.
TN: Right. Okay. Very good. Shannon, what are you looking for?
SR: More chop. A lot more chop. I think the jobs report on Friday, there was a quote that it was goldilocks-ish it was not goldilocks-ish if you’re the Fed. The Fed saw a lot of jobs created. It’s a participation tick up and it’s average hourly earnings still sitting at 5.5% for everyone on a year over year basis. Those are three things that they don’t really want to see sitting that high.
TN: Right.
SR: It’s that simple. They would be much happier with 100,000 jobs created or lower. I think they want a couple of negative prints. An average hourly earnings that’s closer to 2% year over year. That means that the wage price spiral isn’t happening. And they really want an awful lot of call it pain in the inflation space. So you’re not really seeing anything to knock the Fed off of its current path. And if anything, you probably gave it a little bit of a tailwind to some more hawkish rhetoric.
Brainard being a Hawk? That should scare everyone. Because when Brainard comes out as a Hawk, that’s a signal.
TN: That’s weird.
SR: That’s a signal that they’re going and they’re going hard.
TN: Yeah, that’s upside down world weird. And then was it May said out yesterday saying they could do another fifty in September?
SR: Yeah. After the print on Friday, guess what, this is the best part about the Brainard statement is she said in order to have a better balance in the labor market, they need to see job openings decline.
This is critical, though. Job openings are reported a month lagged to everything else. Right. So in September, they’re going to be looking at maybe August.
TN: Let me ask you this. Elon Musk was out this week saying, hey, if you’re not going to come back to the office, we’re going to consider that you resigned. Are we going to see more CEOs do that? And could that potentially have an impact on the jobs numbers?
SR: Not really. One, Musk, then he said we’re over staffed by 10% across salaried workers. So the statement for Musk was probably more to get some natural attrition. So we didn’t have to actually lay off people because it’s a lot cheaper when people quit than it is when people get laid off. And Musk needs a couple of headlines because his Twitter deal was a really dumb idea.
TN: Yeah. And also I kind of preempted Musk by two years. I told my staff in June of 2020, but if you don’t show up, you could resign. So I was early on that boat. So Albert, what do you expect in the week ahead.
AM: Everyone saw Yellen come out and say I missed the inflation and how bad it’s going to be. That’s her getting ahead of the CPI print. It’s going to be a bad one. I think it actually could get close to 9% which would be not good for the markets.
On top of that Opex Fed minute coming up, I think we’re going to be like Sam said, I think there’s going to be some chop. They’re doing their best to keep this thing above 4200. So I think we’re going to be looking at probably push 4250 which is a bull bear line this week until CPI print comes in and then Armageddon.
TN: That’s what you said last week.
AM: That’s a 4200 on that Monday on futures.
TN: Okay.
AM: They tried but they sold it. Everyone’s just selling.
TN: Okay. So we have another chance this week.
AM: Yes.
TN: Great guys. Thank you very much. This has been a great discussion. Thanks so much and I really appreciate this. Have a great week ahead.
The VIX or the “fear gauge” has been trading sideways but what does it indicate about equity market expectation? And US home sales in April fell to their lowest in 9 years, brought down by rising mortgage rates but how adversely will this impact the property and construction sector? Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence tells us more.
Show Notes
SM: Bfm 89 Nine. Good morning. You are listening to the morning run at on Thursday the 26th May. I’m Shazana Mokhtar with Khoo Hsu Chuang and Tan Chen Li. First, let’s recap how global markets closed overnight in the US.
KHC: Doll up zero 6%. Smp 500 up 1%. Nasdaq up 1.5%. Asian markets. Nikay down .3% Hong Kong’s up 3%. Shanghai Composite up 1.2%. Sti down .5% FBN KLCI up zero 3%.
SM: So for some thoughts on what’s moving markets, we speak to Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence. Tony, good morning. Let’s get some reactions on US markets overnight. They interpreted the latest Fed meetings pretty favorably. It seems the US stocks all inched upwards. What did they find reassuring about the Fed’s policy direction?
TN: I think they were just looking for some direction that things weren’t going to be worse than the guidance that they received previously because commodity prices haven’t stopped rising necessarily. And so I think people were afraid that the Fed might accelerate their plan to stop inflation and just a little bit of a nudge that they probably weren’t going to do that and they were going to remain flexible, probably help things out after hours. You had Nvidia report, which was really disappointing. And so the Nasdaq futures are down pretty far right now. So although we had a good trading today, things are looking a little bit pessimistic for tomorrow based on some earnings.
TCL: Yeah. So the Fed translators have a TLDR conclusion on the Fed minutes yesterday. We have it at three more basis, 50 basis points hikes, and then an indefinite pause. Tony, what do you think about that translation?
TN: So I think what they’re saying is where investors are seeing say for the next six months that things will be pretty stable. They can Bake in the 250 basis point rises, and from there it’s pretty easy to calculate how much tolerance you have. The other factor to think through is how much the Fed will tighten for the next six months. And that’s already baked in how much they’re tightening their balance sheet. And I think that’s $23 billion a month, or 32. I can’t remember the number exactly, but it’s a stable number, and that’s really unlikely to accelerate.
TCL: Tony, does it set the stage for a second half risk rally?
TN: Yeah, it possibly could because it’s campaign season and nobody really wants to be tightening going into a campaign. So it’s possible. There’s a lot of talk about recession, and if there is a recession, we’re already in the middle of it. So there’s no sense kind of worrying about it because it’s already here. If that’s the case, we already had a first quarter contraction in US GDP. If we have a second quarter, we’re already halfway through that anyway, almost so or two thirds of the way through that. So it doesn’t really matter that much. And I think people are starting to look at that in a different light.
KHC: The CTO volatility index or the fear gauge has been moving sideways between 25 and 35 over the last month. What would that trading pattern indicate about equity market expectations?
TN: Yes. So the VIX really is it measures volatility of SMP 500 options over the next 30 days. And so it tells me that there is, I would say heightened sensitivity or elevated volatility expected. But I wouldn’t necessarily say it’s extreme. So it doesn’t appear that people are looking for some sort of extreme, say May or April 2020 type of event. So people are worried about further falls in equities for their pullbacks in equities. But I don’t necessarily based on what we’re seeing in the VIX, not necessarily seeing people expect things to fall off a cliff.
SM: And I think looking at how the rise in interest rates, what kind of impact has been having so far, we may be seeing that in US home sales because in April it fell to their lowest in nine years. But what other headwinds do you see facing the US housing market and how do you think it’s going to impact property and the construction sector moving forward?
TN: Yes. People in the US talked about supply like there’s a short supply on the market or not enough supply. In May, we actually went up to nine months of housing supply on the market. What that means is the number of, say, homes that are on the market, given the current pace of buying, would last for nine months. Of course, there is short supply in some markets, but in general, there seems to be across the US at least ample supply. So people are going to pull in their expectations for price given that interest rates have risen. But if they continue to rise, they’ll want to rush their purchases forward, which is possibly what we’ll see, especially over the next 30 days or so, because people always want to save a little bit more on the interest rate. So I don’t see a lot unless we start seeing mass layoff events or something like that. I’m not sure how much of this you see Malaysia, but we did see a lot of all cash buyers for houses in the US. And what’s been happening there is people will take out a loan, a cash loan against their equity portfolio.
TN: We will definitely see that stop because equities are not as relevant as they were 60, 90 days ago. There have been some calls on those loans and so some of those transactions have had to stop. So I think that’s what’s led part of what’s led to a little bit more supply on the market and may slow down some of the purchase transactions.
TCL: Yeah. Tony is still on properties. I think I read somewhere that the median home price in America across the whole country is somewhere around either 349,000, $391,000 per house, which is the highest it’s ever been in a number of years. Do you see that house inflation continuing to creep upwards, or do you think it’s kind of like peaks off and it’s going to taper off?
TN: I think we do have a lot of new houses under construction, so I don’t necessarily think we’ll see that continue to rise at the rate that we’ve seen. If we do, we’ll continue for a period, maybe six to twelve months or something. But I don’t necessarily see house prices continue to rise, especially with interest rates rising. If we had kept interest rates where they were, then sure, we’d continue to see house prices rise at that rate, but because they’re pulling that lever, I think they’re going to let it sit, of course, as Palo said, for a period of time. But if house prices continue to rise in an uncontrolled way, I think they’ll come back in and intervene with interest rates.
KHC: And with India now restricting sugar exports and Malaysia doing the same with chicken, where is the trend towards food protectionism headed, and are we looking at a global food crisis?
TN: Yeah, I think your last question first. Yeah, I think we are definitely looking at a global food crisis. Well, maybe not global a regional food crisis in certain regions. Of course, there have been protests in Iran, supposedly over food prices. We’ve seen issues in Sri Lanka, of course, places like Egypt, different countries. There are problems. But I think some of this is related to Ukraine’s inability to export Ukraine and Russia’s inability to export some of their goods. And yeah, some of it’s protectionist with sugar in India and other things. But I think the countries that are holding back exports are more focused on providing for their citizens, and I think they’re trying to visually make sure that their citizens see that as a priority. So the citizens aren’t protesting and upset. And if we look at what’s happening in Pakistan right now, so citizens aren’t protesting and upset. So the political leadership is actually seen to be doing something to hold some food back for their clients or their citizens as a hedge against inflation. So I think part of it is political. I know it’s a little bit protectionist, but I think it’s more just being very careful about being prudent for their citizens.
SM: Tony, thanks very much for speaking to us this morning. That was Tony Nash, CEO of Complete Intelligence, weighing in on some of the trends that he sees moving markets, commenting on, I suppose his outlook for the housing sector in the US, which has taken a different trajectory from Malaysia, which are housing hasn’t really gone anywhere for the past two, three years, six years, actually.
TCL: Yeah. In fact, since 2014. But I just checked some of the data from America, the Fred statistics from the St. Louis Fed prices. The median house price in America is $430,000. Of course, median is the middle number between the top and bottom, $430,000 per house in America. That’s average let’s reach out what 1.8 million ring? That’s a lot of money.
SM: That’s inflation for you 717. In the morning we’re heading into some messages. And after that all you should know about green bonds in the region. Stay tuned to BFM 89.9.
We’ve had a big week in markets. The S&P is up 5 percent. We’re looking at whether this rally has legs, where’s the volatility, and if the recession is canceled? Also, we have a shorter trading week next week due to Memorial Day on Monday in the US. What’s to expect in 4 days?
Key themes:
Does this relief rally have legs?
Where’s the volatility?
Is the recession canceled?
What’s ahead for next week?
This is the 20th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.
0:00 Start 1:10 Does this rally have legs? 1:58 When will the tail end? 2:40 Crypto has no participation in the rally 3:31 Why tech is still weak? 3:52 Why tech is so subdued? 5:00 What to expect in the options market in the next 4 weeks? 6:42 Durable goods chart from Sam’s newsletter. 8:52 Layoffs in tech, will it continue? 11:30 Will investors and analysts become tougher on companies as we normalize? 13:55 Will we have a recalibration of valuation expectation if there is no recession? 14:34 What to watch out in the 4-day trading week?
Listen on Spotify:
Transcript
TN: Hi, everyone, and welcome to The Week Ahead. This is Tony Nash and I’m joined by Sam Rines and Albert Marko today. We’ve had a big week in markets. The S&P is up 5 percent.
So we’re going to look at a few topics today. First, does the relief rally have legs? We’re also going to take a look at volatility and the recession. Is the recession canceled? What’s happening there? We’ve heard a lot of talk about that. And finally, we’re going to look at the week ahead. So what do we expect for the short week ahead in the US? We have a holiday here in the US on Monday. So what do we expect for Tuesday to Friday in US trading?
So let’s go to you with this relief rally. What’s your thought on this? Does this relief rally have legs?
AM: In short? No, not really. The Fed uses many tools to produce rallies. A lot of it is coming. This week was short covering. Previously, what you’ve seen, especially when during a holiday season, holiday hours, whereas like when I was trading, a lot of liquidity out there is they actually serve the market. They did this over Thanksgiving. They did this over Christmas. If you go back and look at the charts, those 4800 prints were done over holiday trading hours. It’s easy for them to do it. Does it have legs? Probably not.
TN: So legs. Does the tail of this last few days next week, or is Friday the last kind of really interesting day we see for a while?
AM: Well, they have a tendency to figure out what the Bull bear line is, and I think it’s at 4250. Don’t be surprised if Tuesday we’re in the 4200 pushing that line. That’s when the put options are absolutely just completely obliterated after today, for sure, by Tuesday. And then people start getting bulled up. Once they get bulled up, they just pulled the rug.
TN: Sam, what do you think?
SR: Well, I think it’s really interesting that you saw this rally and you had basically no participation in crypto. Crypto tends to be tip of the spear type risk. If you really want to put some significant risk on in a portfolio, you go ahead and buy crypto. That’s just what you do.
So I think that’s a fairly telling sign that, yes, there is a rally underway. And if you look at it, oil is ripping right now, particularly some of the smaller producers. So you are getting some of the underlying stuff moving, but you’re really not having that tip of the spear, real risk type move that you would really want to see for some sort of sustained long-term risk-on type rally.
TN: And we saw guys in Nvidia really take a hit this week. Granted, it’s coming back a little bit, but tech is still weak. And so we’re not seeing some of those risk names really come back.
AM: Yeah. What’s interesting and this goes into the next topic is how are they rallying the market if tech’s not running.
TN: Right. So let’s talk about that. Why is volatility so subdued? I’m not really sure. So we’ve got a chart for the VIX up on the screen. So can you talk us through it’s the lowest point it’s been since Covid. So what’s going on there?
AM: Yeah. So the question is how could it be at a three-year low with such bad news out in the market? Raising rates, Fed sitting there talking Armageddon when it comes to the markets, bad news, bad earnings, everything is going wrong. How possibly could this thing be at the three or low?
Well, they keep it there on purpose to sit there and subdue the VIX. Well, now the VIX is at what, 28? I believe it is right now. But really, they could probably take this to 22 and use that to rally the market rather than tech. But, man, I’ll tell you what, you got to be very careful because the VIX at 22, and if they start rallying the market at that point, 4250 is could be the tip of the iceberg. You know what I mean?
TN: Oh, yeah. I guess my question, Albert, is the VIX measures S&P options for the next 30 days. Right. And so what it’s telling me is that the options over the next four weeks aren’t expecting a dramatic downward move. So are they just playing in that options market to make sure that it looks pretty orderly or what exactly is happening?
AM: Oh, yeah. They’re creating a story. They’re creating a narrative and tell you, hey, it’s time for you guys to get bulled up. Okay. Their objective is to erase excess money out the system and to give us a soft landing. They have said this much to Sam’s point, which he’ll talk about is they said we’re going to raise rates and we’re going to let off when we have to let off. They’re giving you all these signals to get bulled up.
TN: Yeah. I just want to make it clear because I think there’s a misconception out there about the VIX. I think a lot of people believe that the VIX reflects volatility in the market today. And that’s not at all it. I just want to make clear as we talk about it, that we’re looking at the options market over the next 30 days and how the Fed potentially is playing in that options market to make things look like a soft landing. Right?
AM: Yeah. They’ve erased trillions of dollars in the past OPEXes, and they’re just lining everybody up for another one. I mean, I think at one time it was 9 trillion. Another instance was 11 trillion. Just obliterated options.
TN: There’s a lot of opportunity in this. Right. I mean, if you see what’s coming, it can be really interesting.
AM: Well, this is a pattern thing. People do what they know. They’re creatures of habit. Fed is no different.
TN: That’s right. Very good. So on that note, Sam, you had an interesting newsletter out this week looking at kind of the recession. And one of the interesting charts which you have now is looking at durable goods, all durable goods and durable goods, excluding transportation.
Can you talk us through that a little bit and help us understand what that means for kind of the recession that we hear talked about so much over the past few weeks?
SR: Yeah, certainly. It’s pretty straightforward. Right. If you look at a combination of same-store sales across for retailers across all of them and not just a few big ones that made headlines, things were fine. Then you look at durable goods.
Durable goods skyrocketed coming out of COVID. And guess what? They’re continuing to make new COVID highs. Yeah. They just put it on a month-over-month basis. But it’s pretty aggressive to say that while they’re still growing and still ex-autos above anything that you can get back into the 80s. That’s a pretty big figure there.
It’s very hard to say, hey, we’re in the middle of or entering a recession when you have jobless claims sitting at 210, 215 thousand a week and you have durable goods sitting that high, the Red book same-store sales are in the low teens. That is an absolutely stunning figure for any time outside of call it COVID. Right. I mean, normally you’re very pleased with a 5% figure.
So it’s very difficult to get to the whole recession narrative unless you’re looking for something to really break here in a major way. We’ve already seen a housing break. I mean, we called that out a long time ago, but at the end of the day, if you don’t have people defaulting on their homes, which they’re not, and you don’t have a significant number of layoffs in the construction industry, which we haven’t seen, you can have a slowdown in home building and home builders and home buying and not really have it be systemically important to the US economy.
TN: Right. And we’ve had some layouts in Tech, which you talked about a couple of weeks ago, but a lot of those are bodies that people kind of panic bought. Right. They overbought headcount and now they’re shedding that headcount that they overbought.
I don’t know if that’s isolated to Tech or if that’s just happened across a service industry generally, but it seems like we’re starting to see a narrative that there’s a lot of layouts happening and a lot more coming. Do you see much of that, or are you seeing much of that outside of Tech?
SR: No, not really. It’s a San Francisco problem, not a San Diego problem. That’s the way I like to frame it is. Yeah. You overhired a lot of people in tech.
TN: And paid a huge amount of money for them.
SR: And paid a premium. And when you paid a premium and figured out that COVID wasn’t forever and the COVID demand wasn’t forever, if you want to realign your cost structure with your revenue outlook, you’ve got to take some head count down. But to be honest, you’re really not seeing it be something that’s systemic to say the entirety of the labor market by any stretch. West Texas isn’t laying people off on the oil drilling front. They still need.
TN: I’ve two friends who’ve just been hired to go out on rigs in the past two months. I mean, that is still building up.
SR: It’s still building up. And there’s nowhere near enough labor to do it. And you don’t have enough labor and leisure, right?
TN: Yeah.
SR: I really do think that we’re going to see the summer of vacations at any price. And if you look at leisure and hospitality, they are well understaffed. And that’s going to continue to be a problem. This is San Francisco problem, not a San Diego problem.
TN: Okay. So let me ask you guys, and I’ve been running through this, bouncing this off a couple of people over the past couple of weeks. But through the COVID period, banking analysts and investors have been pretty lenient on management teams. Hey, just make it through. Just keep running your business. Yes. We can tolerate a lot of kind of variability. They’re very forgiving on things.
Now that we’re normalizing, and I heard someone say this week something like only 7% of the workforce is actually working from home. I don’t know if that’s accurate or not, but I heard somebody say that maybe it was 17, but I think it was seven.
But now that we’re kind of normalizing, will those investors and analysts become tougher on companies on those management teams? Because it seems like they’ve been very loose, giving them huge birth to do whatever they want just to keep the business together over COVID? Are those expectations tightening down?
AM: I would have to say absolutely. I mean, in the past two years, you’re talking about just companies treading water, navigating the turbulent water of the market. Now you need actual leadership to figure out what’s going on with the supply chains, how to get workers working at a productive rate, getting supply and so on and so forth.
It’s crunch time now because although we can talk about a recession not happening, and I think that’s accurate. Look at the retail numbers that just keep coming out. We even said don’t short retail do that. The piper has got to be paid and management has to step up right now. 100%.
SR: Yeah. And step down. I think that’s a completely relevant one. And a lot of it is concentrated in VC.
TN: Right.
SR: A lot of it is things that you don’t get the AK on. These are private companies that raised at ridiculous multiples during COVID. Those are going to continue to see some downroads here.
TN: Right. But not just in private companies. Do you think that because of the change expectations post COVID, do you think we’ll see some management turnover in some large companies?
SR: Yeah. You’ve already seen Jack Dorsey out, right? You’ve seen that kind of called the Elon effect on that front? Yes. You’re going to see a lot of them.
In particular, I would say you’re probably going to see give it six to nine months when the body is washed up on shore from the downturn in DC, there’s going to be a lot of people that went over their toes there and they’re going to be axed.
AM: Yeah. Not just that, Sam. Not just that being pressured but also there’s going to be a lot of companies out there looking for merges and acquisitions that are going to force these.
TN: So if we don’t have a recession, we’ll still have a recalibration of, say, valuation expectations. Is that fair to say?
AM: I would say so. I mean, talking about recession, it’s a numbers thing. It’s a perception of what numbers is being displayed by the Fed and the Treasury. I mean, they can just fabricate those for however long they have to. So you won’t technically be in recession, but wage inflation, inflation is going out of control.
TN: You kind of rolled your eyes when I said that, but what were you thinking?
SR: I don’t know.
TN: That’s a good answer. What do you expect for next week? We’ve got four trading days next week. What’s going through your mind and what are you thinking about as you go into the holiday weekend?
AM: Bull bear line, 4250. I expect them to at least try to come close to that. But there’s going to be a lot of sellers out there trying to get whatever they can figuring out that OPEX and the Fed minutes are coming out next month with more rate hikes.
TN: Okay, 4250 on the S&P. Sam, what are you thinking?
SR: I’ll be watching the dollar really closely. If you continue to see a lot less pressure underneath the dollar here, oil is going to moon. So I’m watching oil very closely, mostly due to the dollar and some downward pressure on longer term rates. As we continue to see the narrative of the fed go fast then backtrack call it 1994 with 2001 characteristics.
TN: Interesting. It’ll be great to see. It’d be really interesting to see it, guys. Have a great holiday weekend. Thanks very much and have a great week ahead. Thank you.
Millions of Australians decide whether or not to vote back in the Conservatives after nine years under the party’s rule. BBC’s Katie Silver and Australian economist Tim Harcourt tell us more. Rising fuel prices have led food delivery drivers to strike for days in the United Arab Emirates, where industrial action is banned. BBC’s Sameer Hashmi explains their struggle from Dubai. Adi Imsirovic from the Oxford Institute for Energy Studies gives us his views on the former German chancellor Gerhard Schroeder’s recent resignation from the board of directors of Russia’s state-owned oil company, Rosneft. In Korea, president Joe Biden begins his five-day Asia trip with a visit to a Samsung semiconductor plant. We talked to Carolina Milanesi, president of analyst and market research firm Creative Strategies, about this. Vivienne Nunis is joined throughout the programme by guests Tony Nash, Chief Economist at Complete Intelligence in Houston, Texas, and Karen Percy, Senior freelance reporter in Melbourne.
Show Notes
VN: Tony Nash, who’s the chief economist at Complete Intelligence in Houston, Texas, is one of them. Welcome back to the program, Tony.
TN: Hi, Vivian. Thank you.
VN: Thanks for joining us again, Tony Nash. Listening to that. It’s interesting, isn’t it? It doesn’t matter where you are in in the world. The energy crisis triggered by the war in Ukraine is forcing drivers to fill the pinch wherever they are.
TN: Yes. I live in Texas, and we produce a lot of oil here.
VN: What’s the situation there?
TN: Oil is rising pretty quickly. The price of gasoline is rising pretty quickly. So both regard to the UAE. I spent a bit of time in the region, and the prices are always lower. They’re very cheap. But what’s interesting about the delivery business is if the cost of petrol is impacting the delivery business, that could be a real issue for that business model. I think we’ve been in an era of relatively low petrol prices, and if those prices remain high, it could be a real challenge for that business model at some point.
VN: So you’re saying that fuel prices are already cheaper compared to, say, global averages in the US, and I guess they are in the US as well. They’re heavily subsidized, aren’t they? I guess the question is, should governments be stepping in where they can to ease that pressure on drivers and everyone facing various cost of living pressures?
TN: Well, with UAE, actually, the prices in May for fuel are lower than they were in April. They’re still elevated, but they have come down a small amount, like 2% or something. But I think if the government is to help people, all that will do is I think we’ll only have higher crew prices or higher sorry, fuel prices. So it’s a hard thing to say, but I think more money toward it will only make those prices higher as more people consume kind of at the same levels, but with the subsidies. So it’s a very hard time. And I think it’s something that maybe the companies should help their drivers with, not necessarily the governments. These people are working on behalf of the company. And so perhaps the company should help their drivers a little bit with fuel.
VN: Tony, this story is moving all the time, isn’t it? We’ll get to some of that in a moment. But firstly, it was rather extraordinary, wasn’t it, that Gerhard Schroeder didn’t resign from that position on the board of Rosneft until today?
TN: Yeah. It’s weird that he took up the position in the first place. I remember when it happened 20 or so years ago, and it just seemed like a strange appointment at the time. But it took him 20 years to make the decision. So, yeah, it’s well overdue and it seemed fishy from the start. And I think Germans have been extraordinarily patient in putting their pressure on him to get it done.
VN: Well, we don’t know there was anything fishy, of course. I mean, perhaps the pressure only really came on to him since this invasion by Russia into Ukraine, given that before that, Russia and German energy relations were pretty tight.
TN: Sure. Yeah. But Germany had at some point looked at, say, taking LNG from other parts of the world, Qatar, US, other places, and they chose not to do that and really have Russia as their only source, I believe, largely because of lobbying that Schroeder participated in. So had Schroeder not worked with Gasprom, there’s a feasible scenario that Germany would have multiple sources of natural gas and oil and not really just looking at Russia.
VN: I mean, Tony, I guess what is fairly obvious that it was a very lucrative position there, and that’s probably one of the reasons why he stayed so long.
TN: Sure. And as a former Prime Minister, it is awkward for him to lobby to single source energy from one country. I get it. Of course, it’s lucrative and everybody has to pay the bills somehow. But this was particularly odd.
VN: Okay. Let’s leave it there. Thank you both for your thoughts on that. Tony. It was interesting, wasn’t it, how President Biden almost made a beeline to that Samsung plant straight off the plane after he landed in South Korea, obviously underlining that relationship with South Korea, but also the importance of semiconductors in today’s economy.
TN: Sure. So I live in Texas, and Samsung last year announced a $17 billion chip Fab investment just north of Austin, Texas. And Texas Instruments is also building a new chip Fab in North Texas. So there are three new chip fabs that have been announced or major new chip fabs that have been announced in the US over the past couple of years. And two of them are in Texas. And so that $17 billion of investment that Samsung is making is really the reason for the trip. So that chip Fab that’s in Texas, there’s got to be a lot of thank yous to Samsung for making that investment in the US.
VN: So it’s not a wider move then by the US to really try and encourage that kind of thing in its own shores. We talk about onshoring we’ve seen so many delays in global supply chains throughout the pandemic. We’ve seen shipping crises. Is this an idea to try and prevent any of that from happening in the past and get those made in the country closer to some of those big companies like Apple and intel, for instance.
TN: That has been underway for probably five years. The movement to getting technology firms, particularly semiconductor and defense related technology firms, building more either in the US or in the NAFTA or the North American Trade Agreement area. So that started particularly after the 2016 election, and it’s continued in the Biden administration trying to get more of that technology development and technology manufacturing in the US.
VN: And right where you are in Texas. Well, not exactly where you are, but somewhere in Texas we’re hearing not just about these semiconductor plants, but also, of course, Tesla moving a Gigafactory there as well, out of California and into Texas.
TN: Right. Tesla, Oracle, HP, many firms have decided to relocate to Texas. It’s a great workforce. I’m here. I run an artificial intelligence company here, and people here like to work. And so it’s a really good location for technology companies.
VN: It’s not just the hard work, though, isn’t it? Also about tax rates, if I recall.
TN: It’s about tax rates. It’s about research dollars. So the universities here get a massive amount of research dollars and spend a lot of money on research. And it’s the quality of education that’s here. So all of those things combined, of course, Samsung got subsidies for building its Fab and Taylor, but I think they could probably get subsidies from anybody. They’re kind of really looking at the whole environment that they plant their business in.
VN: It’s interesting because we always think, well, originally we thought about California dominating the tech industry. Now we’re hearing about Texas, as you’ve just mentioned. I spoke to Carolina, who we heard from earlier. She’s actually moved out of California into Atlanta. And she told me that’s a growing tech hub, too, used to be a kind of base for telecoms companies, but now it’s attracting some of those tech firms, too.
TN: Yeah, I think there are a lot of kind of mini tech hubs around the US, and you can find them in different clusters around the US. And so it’s really just a matter of what critical mass can you get and what specialization can you get, and then how do you build around those specializations? So, for example, Tesla moves to Austin, and their vendors are then required to move to Austin as well. Right. And that creates a cluster around what Tesla does. So really getting those bigger fish to move their vendors and build that whole system is pretty critical. And the Texas governor, Greg Abbott, has actually done a really good job of recruiting those firms here because it’s only the last four or five years that a lot of that’s happened.
VN: Okay, well, thank you, Tony, for all of that insight from Texas. Do you take ketchup and mustard on your hot dogs?
TN: You’re supposed to only eat mustard on hot dogs. I’m sorry, but this is the law of the land.
KP: It’s an abomination. I have a Canadian Hudson who does the same thing.
VN: Okay, so just mustard, you said. Okay, Tony asking you in watching along in the US. I mean, Boeing getting into this private space race. Now, Boeing has been in the news for all the wrong reasons over the last few years. Those two very serious fatal crashes. There’s a lot riding on this venture, Tony. Have I still got you there?
TN: Yeah, I’m here. Can you hear me?
VN: Yeah. So just talking about Boeing, they’ve had a pretty rough ride, given those two facial crashes. A lot riding on this venture into space.
TN: Absolutely. And they need some good news stories. And if this is a good news story for for them, that’s great. I hope it ends up well.
VN: Okay. Thank you, Karen Percy in Melbourne and Tony Nash in Texas. You’ve been listening to business matters with me, Vivian Nunes. Thanks for the team in Manchester here as well. Bye for now.
The number one issue for Americans is inflation. As long as this is a top consideration, the pressure will be on the Fed to bring it down. Sam has been pretty consistent with 3 x 50 rate hikes in May, June, and July. What changed in trading today? Is everyone still bearish? Samuel Rines explains.
Also, what’s next for crypto? Luna fell from $90 last Thursday to $0.00005952 on Friday. Their circulation went from 4 billion yesterday to 6.5 trillion today. Watching the crypto fallout is terrible – lots of people have lost lots of money in this supposedly immutable “currency”. Albert Marko explains what happens next.
Lastly, is China really falling apart? We’ve seen some unsettling posts over the past several weeks out of China. From lockdowns to port closures to gossip that Xi Jinping has been sidelined.
Key themes:
Is everyone a bear now?
What’s next for crypto?
Is China really falling apart?
This is the 18th episode of The Week Ahead, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.
TN: Hi and welcome to the Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash, and as usual, we have our team, Sam Rines and Albert Marko. Tracy, who’s not with us today.
Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to subscribe to our YouTube channel. It helps us a lot get visibility, and it really helps you get reminded when a new episode is out so you don’t miss anything.
Gosh. Big week for everyone. I wish I had fallen asleep a week ago and just woken up now after Friday’s trading. But it’s been a big week all around for everyone.
Guys, we really have a lot to talk about this week. We’re covering the markets. Is everyone a bear now? That’s one of our big topics that we’ll have Sam lean on. Next is what’s next for crypto? A lot of action on crypto, a lot of scary things happening with crypto and then some news out of China or speculation out of China. We’re asking, is China falling apart?
So Sam, let’s start with you first. I guess one of the most relevant items I’ve seen circulating and it was in your newsletter today is the top issues for Americans on the screen right now.
It’s clearly inflation. As long as that’s a top consideration. The pressure on the Fed to bring inflation down is huge. So you’ve been pretty consistent with three times 50 basis point hikes for May, June and July. What’s really changed in trading today? And is everyone still bearish?
SR: Yeah. I mean, everyone still seems to kind of be floating a little bearish, but I kind of like to go back to the number one concern is inflation. We shot ourselves in the foot and then the second one is getting shot in the head, right. It’s violent crime and crime. You add those two together and it’s even larger portion of inflation. So it’s safety and food. Right.
People like to eat and they want to be able to eat and they want to feel safe. I think it’s that simple. Those should be the top two concerns in this type of environment when you have the data pointing towards continuing higher inflation numbers and continuing crime.
On the is everyone a bear front? I think it’s a little complicated, right.
Because if you look at the flows into and out of indices and into and out of fixed income, and when you look at the flows, it’s easy to kind of say everyone’s a bear. Right. Pouring money into Treasuries, taking money out of indices. But at the same time, underneath the surface, you really want to be careful on what you’re a bear on and what you’re not.
There’s a lot of things that can still make money in this environment, oil, food, etc. can still make money. And there’s a lot of things that are probably still going to get torched. Anything that’s a little high beta is probably not the place you want to be for the whole time. Tradable but unlikely to be a long-term type trade.
TN: Like, I noticed some of the techs coming back today, and that’s great. And I hope people don’t lose more there. But is that something that you would consider kind of be careful if you’re going back in type of trade?
SR: Some of it. Not all of it. There’s a lot of tech that actually looks fairly attractive here, whether it’s from a valuation perspective or whether it’s from a very long term perspective.
A lot of stuff re-rated, re-rated fast, and it looks attractive. And there’s a lot of stuff that looks like it’s probably going bankrupt. Right. I wouldn’t be trying to bottom tick Carvana.
AM: Actually to expand on that, Sam, about who’s a bear and bears or Bulls or whatnot. I kind of think that we have to separate the higher great institutions versus the retail dip buyers that are just looking for that get rich, quick return. Many of the institutions, the ones I’ve talked to, are absolutely still bearish. They don’t see real value in this economy until the market until 3700.
Coincidentally, one of the hedge fund guys told me at 3500, you have an actual financial crisis in the United States just because everything’s leveraged up. So I don’t think that the Fed was even going to want to afford or going down past the 38, 3700, in my opinion.
SR: In 100% of that, Albert. Right. You have to separate those two teams of people. Right. The dip buyers are going to try every single time to get rich quick. Real long term allocators are going to take their time here. They’re not going to rush and, those are very large positions they have to take. And they don’t get to move in and call it for two or three weeks. They have to move in for very long periods of time.
So it’s Albert’s point. I don’t think that should be underrated, period.
AM: You can just look at the valuations of some of these companies that are still out in the stratosphere, like one of the ones I’ve recommended, Mosaic, Tight and Tire. They’re just ten fold of what they were in 2020. How do you buy these things? You can’t buy these things.
TN: Right. We’ve seen a lot of chatter about margin calls over the past week and a half. Obviously, that’s been scary for the first wave of kind of people going in. But when that second wave hits, when does that start to hit that second wave? Once we go 3800 or lower? So is that when things get really scary?
AM: Actually, I think part of the margin calls happened this week, today, actually Friday. I think a lot of guys had a liquidate positions and cover shorts and whatnot. And we got a little bit of a squeeze of a rally. I didn’t really feel like a Fed was pumping just thought like people short covers and people trying to get stuff off the board.
TN: Right.
SR: 100%. That’s where I think. I don’t think you want to be in front of a wave of liquidation for let’s call it sun and Ark, right? You do not want to be in front of either one of those two right now, period.
TN: Yeah, it was nice to have a Green Day, but it didn’t necessarily feel like a strong Green Day.
Okay, guys, let’s move on to crypto. Albert, I think you’re the man here. You’ve talked about crypto for a long time. It’s bad. This week is bad. And we’ve got a chart for Luna.
Luna fell from $90 last Thursday to 5, 10 thousand of a cent today, I think. Their circulation went from 4 billion yesterday to 6.5 trillion today. So it doesn’t sound very immutable to me. So the watching crypto fallout, it’s been pretty terrible. Lots of people have lost lots of money and people are questioning and cynical about words like immutable now.
This is something that I think experienced people have expected. But what happens next? Do we have a clearing out of some of these currencies? Do people just hold at 5, 10 thousand of a cents? Do we see some of these actually become currencies or is it all just going to get regulated and kind of thrown out the window?
AM: Well, are they going to be currencies? No, they’ll never be currencies. The dollar is going to be the currency of the world status for trade for the remainder of our lifetimes, whoever is alive today. That’s just the basic fundamental fact that you have to come to grips with.
This is like part one of the closing call for cryptos in my opinion. They got a good dose of the reality that when things need to get liquidated, you’re not liquidating residential towers in Miami on your portfolio. You’re liquidating some Ponzi scheme cryptos that are in your pocket that your clients really made you get into to begin with.
From the retail side, as much as I want to gloat, because I’ve been saying that this was going to happen for years, it’s really not that funny because you had guys out there pushing these crypto things and saying the dollar is dying, gold is dying, digital future, blah, blah, blah. Look at this chart, look at that chart. But the reality is there are nothing but pump and dump schemes. And people lost a lot of money.
I had a friend that goes to school, his daughter goes to school with my daughter. And he told me months ago I put everything to Litecoin for the College fund. I tried to reason with this guy.
TN: Please don’t do that.
AM: Yeah, well, community college for that kid.
TN: Albert, they’re following the lead of some, analysts are credible. They have a credible history and they’ve really started pushing this stuff. Now they’ve dialed it back. But some people who had previously been credible analysts were pushing this stuff.
AM: They’re liars. They’re all liars.
SR: Had been.
AM: They’re trying to get services sold and people to watch their YouTube channels and get subscriptions up. So of course you’re going to go and sit there and try to pump crypto to the retail crowd because they don’t know any better, right?
SR: And anyone who looked if you really dug into the Luna situation, you could understand very quickly how that could unwind in a way that was dramatic. This wasn’t even constructed as well as a pre 2008 money market fund. At least you knew what the money market fund held behind it and how it was going to actually return money to you.
With Tether, it’s supposed to be a crypto ish money market fund. We still don’t know what that actually holds. The whole thing to me is regrettable to Albert’s point, right. The two of us kind of got picked on when we giggled off paying for oil in crypto earlier this year. But the two of us have been kind of like, “no, not so much.” So while it’s tempting to kind of have that little bit of a cocky grin.
It’s a really sad situation and there’s a lot of money that got shredded very quickly there.
TN: Very quickly in less than a week. It’s insane how much money. If anybody who follows me on Twitter knows that I invest in some Doge last year, stuck with it for a few months, got out I did it because it was a joke of a coin. Everyone knew it was a joke of a coin. I wanted to be on part of the joke, and I made some money at it. And that’s it, right? That’s it. You can’t necessarily think of this stuff as a serious investment because it’s so highly unregulated and people engage in this pump and dump stuff.
AM: Yeah. We can have a conversation on this for hours. This is actually at the heart of the problem of the US economy at the moment. All these gig employee, all these gig employees service industry and jobs and whatnot, they left work got into crypto. Got stimulus checks, sat at home, kept getting unemployment, not going to work, and now we’re stuck with the labor shortage in reality. I don’t care what the Fed says and what Yellen says about the market. The labor market is good. The labor market is absolute trash right now. We have no workers anywhere right now. And because. Yeah, this is part of it.
TN: So that’s a good question. With crypto, kind of at least temporarily, maybe permanently dying, does that help the employment picture? Does that help people come back to market even a little bit?
AM: People had tens of thousands of dollars in a Coinbase account that are now $500. They’re going to have to go back to their jobs. And that’s just the reality of it. If you want me to go even a step further, this is probably the intent of the Fed and the treasury is to start eliminating this excess money, forcing people back to work.
SR: Yeah. Oh, 100%. In one of my notes this week that Tony, I think you saw, I sent out the video from SNL of Jimmy Carter saying, hey, get 8% of your money out of your account and light on fire. Guess what? The Fed just did that for millennials.
TN: Yeah.
SR: It’s that simple. The Fed just lit at least 8% of millennial money on fire, generally. Right. And it’s unlikely to come back that quickly. And I think if it wasn’t a direct policy, it was a side effect that the Fed sitting there going, oh, well, that works.
AM: I guarantee I talk to a lot of people. It was a direct policy. I don’t care. I’ll throw the Fed under the bus. They deserve to be thrown under the bus anyways.
TN: Well, yeah, it is where it is. And I would assume more regulations coming at some point because people will scream, especially with Coinbase.
I think it’s Coinbase or one of the exchanges saying that they’re going to undo a lot of the trades over the last two or three days.
AM: Okay.
TN: There are no regulations at all.
SR: Just call them the LME.
TN: Yeah, exactly. So crypto is the LME now, and it’s insane. So a lot of consumer protections are going to be talked about. A lot of regulations going to come in. I think that party is pretty much over.
AM: Yeah. Once the regulations started coming in from Congress and different governments in the world, they’re going to see how false their idea of decentralization really was.
TN: Yeah. Okay, guys, let’s move on to China. We’ve seen a lot over the past few weeks and really gossipy stuff about China. But today I saw a note from Mike Green on Twitter, which is on screen talking about Xi Jinping and Li Kaqiang, and Xi basically being sidelined on May 4.
I also saw another tweet yesterday, a guy going through Shanghai during the lockdown. If you haven’t seen it, the first of the thread is on the screen now. Check it out. It’s really interesting.
China is empty and it’s really sad.
So we’ve seen these really unsettling posts over the past several weeks out of China, from lockdowns to port closures to gossiping Xi as sidelined. So to you guys, what does that all mean? Is it something you’re taking seriously? Do you think it’s something that will have immediate effects? What does that look like to you?
AM: China. China is a big quagmire in itself. It’s such a large country. You’re going to have all sorts of rumors of Xi being sidelined and unrest in different cities like Shanghai and whatnot. But the Chinese are pretty pragmatic. They know that things are not going really well. So they’re going to have to lift off they’re going to have to lift off some of these just draconian policies with locking down people because it’s going to really hurt their economy. And part of it’s probably because they’re fighting inflation, too. They’re trying to cut down demand until supplies catch up. I mean, they got problems over there with inflationary issues.
TN: Also with the deval, with the port closures, with a lot of other stuff that’s happening there, their economy is already host. Right. They’re definitely not hitting 5.5, which is their target this year. And I think they’ll be lucky to have a zero growth year.
But I think Albert, on the political side, a lot of this kind of theater that we’re seeing play out on Weibo and Twitter and other things. Do you think this is plausible?
AM: Of course it’s plausible. I mean, you have the vultures circuit around Xi right now. They want him out. You have one elite group keeping him in power. But most likely have three or four other elite groups within the CCP that want him out. There’s no question about that. He can’t even go out in public.
TN: That’s an important thing that many people don’t think about is there are parties within the party. The CCP is not a unified party. There are factions within the party. Many Westerners don’t understand that. There are definitely factions within the party, and they’ll stab each other in the back in a second.
AM: There’s factions everywhere you go. People try to, China as a one rule or one party, one system, but even the United States, you have the Tea Party, the Freedom Caucus, the Progressive, so on and so forth. I mean, it’s all fragmented no matter what you do.
TN: Yeah, Sam. So China is second largest economy, ports closed, people in their houses, all of that stuff. So how long can they do this before it affects everybody or has it already started doing?
SR: Oh, it’s already affecting everything. The supply chains are already completely ruined because of it. There’s no question about that. I think the real question is what happens when they reopen, right?
We’ve got oil sitting at $109 and half a China is shut down. That is something that doesn’t, I mean, it’s kind of scary, right? You have a bunch of people that aren’t using as much as they should be right now. You begin to spin that back up. That could be a really interesting scenario overall. I don’t know.
AM: You know, Sam, that actually loops back to what you were talking about the Fed trying to fight inflation. No matter what policy they come up with, there’s still supply chain shortages and labor and everything that no matter what they do, they can’t fix.
SR: Their host. It’s an amazing world where you have half the Chinese, let’s just click through. Half the Chinese economy is shut down. You have the US dollar sitting at 105, 106 somewhere in there, and you have oil sitting at 110. Anybody who’s saying oil prices look a little toppy here might want to look at what happens when the dollar falls and China’s going.
AM: That’s what we’re going to have inflation in the five to 7% range for the next 18 months. I can’t say lower than that.
TN: 18 months, you say?
AM: 18 months. How are they going to get it lowered? China opens and then what? You know what I mean? And then you still have shortages everywhere. I mean, go to some of the stores. They have baby formula shortages.
On any given day, you have small materials you need from the home short. Everywhere. That’s going to create artificial inflation. On top of that, you have wage inflation. How do you get that down?
SR: The only way you get it down is having less employees. Look at Silicon Valley. Silicon Valley has started laying people off, and that’s not getting enough. It’s more than just Carvana.
AM: And then that’s the thing. Later in this year, Democrats and Joe Biden can have a real big problem unemployment numbers, starting to creep up. They can’t hide that forever with the BLS manipulation.
SR: Look at the household number. The household number is already not looking great. And that’s the one that they choose not to hide for a reason. Yeah, sure, the establishment is up, but you look at that household number and it’s printing negative already, guys.
TN: Yeah. One more thing I want to cover is this has to do with China shut down and it has to do with the possibility of political instability in China. So there are two separate issues. The newsletter today talked about reshoring.
So these things seem to provide more instability and a lack of reliability of Chinese sourcing. So what are you seeing to support the reshoring argument?
SR: Oh, lots of things. I mean, you have Hyundai. That’s likely to announce a pretty big factory next week in Georgia. You have everyone from Micron to a bunch of other call it higher tech firms beginning to announce that they’re moving back here. They’re building here and they’re going to manufacture here or they’re going to manufacture in Mexico. One of the other.
If you want to have China like characteristics without supply chain issues, you go to Mexico and that re regionalization trend. That’s the theme of mine. Is beginning to pick up steam and it’s going to pick up much more steam, in my opinion.
North America is going to be basically, in my opinion is going back to being the world’s, not manufacturing hub, but the world’s high end manufacturing hub. If you want something that it’ll be like big Germany.
AM: Yeah, I mean that’s just the most logical thing to do is to start putting your supply chains closer to your luxury consumers and you have to do that. But I’ve been high on the Canadian economy and the North American economy.
I think Europe absolutely they’re in deep trouble at the moment. So is Asia. But Europe especially.
TN: On the reshoring note, guys, if Germany can’t get power, will we start to see some German manufacturing firms potentially moving to the US?
SR: You already make AMGs here. Mercedez Ben’s AMGs.
TN: Yeah.
SR: They’re made in Alabama. But they’re made in Alabama.
AM: Yes. But Tony to your question, actually, I do have a colleague that works for Austrian driven outfit and they have been buying factories in the United States specifically for this reason. It’s the only place that people are going to be buying things or has money at the moment. Their entire export industry in China is dead and they’ve sat there and been lackadaisical and never sat there and tried to put their networks back into Africa where the real emerging market should be focused on Africa. It’s going to be bigger than Asia anyway.
SR: Let’s also be honest, they just got done pulling out of Africa in some ways. A couple of decades ago. They missed that boat.
TN: They did. And so did the Americans. So. Hey guys, thank you very much. Really appreciate this. If you’re watching please like and subscribe have a great weekend and have a great week ahead. Thank you.
Fed Chairman Powell was out this week all but assuring a 50bp hike in May, also implying we may see a burst of quick hikes. Then everyone who said “it’s all priced in” two weeks ago panicked on Thursday and Friday. Mike Green shares what’s new here and why are we seeing the reactions now?
We’ve spoken before about Q2 earnings, expecting them to generally be weaker, partly on inflation, which every company is blaming for shortfalls.
– Snapchat missed earnings but it reported 64% revenue growth, with daily active users up 20%.
– Netflix lost subscribers. They’re now the tech cautionary tale.
– FB is falling in anticipation of an earnings shortfall next week.
– Tesla reported a 42% earnings surprise and they’re about even on week
We keep hearing about commodities getting smoked this week. What happened this week and what should we be thinking about right now? We’ve got a bunch of housing metrics out on Tuesday (Case-Shiller, etc). Do the guys expect to see an impact on house prices already or will it take a couple of months/another rate rise to have a noticeable impact?
Key themes from last week:
1. Powell’s Wrecking Ball (Dollar Wrecking Ball)
2. Tech Earnings
3. Commodities getting smoked?
Key themes for the Week Ahead
1. Housing
2. France election
3. Geopolitical lightning round
This is the 15th episode of The Week Ahead in collaboration of Complete Intelligence with Intelligence Quarterly, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.
TN: Hi and welcome to The Week Ahead. My name is Tony Nash. Today we’re with Albert Marko and Mike Green. Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel. Thanks for doing that. I also want to let you know our CI Futures promo ends on April 30th. This is CI Futures, about 3000 assets forecast every month for $50 a month. That promo will end on April 30th. So if you’re interested, please go to completeintel.com/promo and check it out.
So this week we’ve got some key things from the past week. First of all, Powell’s wrecking ball and rate rises and the dollar wrecking ball that comes with that very important item. Tech earnings. We’ve seen a collapse in tech equities over the past couple of days. Not a collapse, but some really interesting activity. We’re going to talk through that. And then commodities. We’ve seen commodities, heard some people say commodities are getting smoked late this week. So let’s talk through that.
So Mike, first let’s look at Fed Chair Powell is out this week, all but assuring a 50 basis point hike in May. And a lot of people think it may be stronger for a longer period of time, maybe June and July even. I hear a lot of people saying a few weeks ago, it’s all been priced in yet we’ve seen kind of some panicking markets on Thursday and Friday. So we’ve got the 10-year on screen right now. So what is new here from your perspective and why are we seeing the reactions now?
MG: So the point that I would argue on this is that we’re in a feedback loop effectively where the market tries to price the Fed’s indications the Fed is in turn responding to the market. And so it’s leading to a dynamic where the Fed is saying, well, look how interest rates are rising, particularly at the back end. Clearly, we’re behind the curve. Therefore, we need to hike more and we need to convey to the market that we’re going to hike more. The market mechanically has to respond to that because you just can’t ignore it. Right.
You have to effectively think of it in a binomial tree type framework. The Fed has told you they’re going to hike more aggressively. Therefore, you need to shift the whole system up. Right. And that feedback loop, I would argue, is what we’re kind of captured in right now. And it’s part of the reason why the market is forced to respond to it in a risk off fashion, et cetera. We just don’t know if the Fed really actually knows what the underlying signal is and how much of it is us and how much of it is their insights onto the economy.
The second thing that I would just highlight is that the Fed has put themselves into the very uncomfortable position of last year, arguing that inflation was transitory. And this has been one of these really frustrating things for those of us that actually agreed with them that it is largely transitory in inflation rate. Right. So the rate of inflation is transitory, but the price level, I don’t expect oil to go back to negative $37 a barrel. That would be absurd. Right, right. So when you talk about the transitory dynamic, it’s typically thought of as the rate. But I think the perception had broadly been the prices themselves were going to somehow come back down and not adjust to the realities of accommodating the difference.
So I think that is sitting at kind of the core of the issue is that the Fed is now in the same way they were trapped in that transitory framework that people began to increasingly malign and make fun of. Now they feel this overwhelming need to come out and tighten and show that they’re actually serious about inflation and reestablish credibility, even as it’s very clear that the economy is starting to slow. And they’re then forced into the mantra of now saying, well, we see no signs of the economy slowing. And so they’re going to have to maintain that for a period of time or they sound like fickle policymakers.
TN: Right.
MG: I think the market is understandably concerned and scared at how far they’re going to have to go to prove to us that they’re really serious.
TN: Right. And Yellen was out saying there will be no recession this year, which I mean, I hope she’s right.
MG: There’s a recession. Yeah.
TN: Exactly. So I was roasting coffee yesterday, and my coffee guy was telling me that coffee prices will stay elevated because of the buying cycle from the farms and so up and down the commodity supply chain, across, it seems, across metals, across crude, across ags. That timing has a real impact on the change in levels. The rate may not change much from here, but it seems like the level will remain elevated, as you’re saying.
MG: I think that’s right. And again, that’s why the transitory, I think, was so toxic and confusing to people because they were thinking, oh, we’re going back to $1.75 gasoline as compared to the $6 in chains that we’re currently paying in California. Right?
TN: Right.
MG: That’s very hard to accomplish under the current framework. And the coffee example is a really good one. It’s not so much the level. The adjustment to the level is painful. Once that level has been reached, all sorts of changes in relative purchasing activity can occur. Right. You can decide you’re going to roast your own beans because it’s cheaper than somebody else’s beans. You can decide that you’re not going to go to Starbucks, you’re going to do your coffee at home and put it into a travel mug to save money.
Whereas the Wall Street Journal highlighted you can reduce your consumption of beef and chicken and increase your consumption of lentils. And yet another example that just pisses people off because it feels completely disconnected from the reality that they’re in. But those are all true statements, right. Those are adjustments that people make once the level settles down. Where the real problem occurs is the uncertainty about the level.
Is it going to be 20% higher next year? Is going to be 20% lower next year? That makes it very hard for me to plan. And that’s really what we’ve experienced. And now what your feedback, what your contacts are telling you is no, prices are going to stabilize at a higher level because that’s what’s required to induce the supply response.
TN: Right.
MG: Okay. It sucks. Coffee is more expensive now, but at least it will be in the stores.
TN: Right. So going down the path of, say, your Wall Street Journal saying you need to eat lentils instead of beef. With interest rates rising, it seems like consumers would utilize more credit during that adjustment period. With rates rising, it seems like it would make things much more difficult. So there’s a double whammy on consumers. Are we seeing that impact right now?
MG: I don’t think we’re yet at the point that the higher interest rates are feeding through in a way that matters. Right. So the vast majority, something like 95% of outstanding mortgages are no longer adjustable rate. They’re fixed rate. And so that is going to be very slow to adjust. We’ll see that the marginal purchasing behavior. And we are absolutely seeing that. We’ve seen a dramatic reduction in refinancing and purchase applications. We’re starting to see traffic deteriorate. We’re starting to see new orders roll over. We’re starting to see consumer spending intentions begin to plummet.
And there’s two reasons why people can use credit cards. Right. You can use credit cards to smooth over effectively saying, hey, guess what? I’m getting paid my bonus next week. Therefore, I’m going to make the purchase now and I’m going to repay it. Or you can see people start to tap credit because they are so strained that they can’t do anything else.
And unfortunately, the evidence that I’m seeing suggests it’s the latter, that it’s the lower income households who are now taking advantage of high cost financing choices in order to sustain a level of consumption that they’re having difficulty retreating from.
If your rent goes up and you don’t want to be homeless and their coffee prices have gone up, at some point, you need to expand your purchasing capacity. And that means using credit.
TN: In basic terms, what we’ve been talking about on this show is demand destruction. The Fed is aimed at demand destruction. And that means that demand curve actually moves in, right?
MG: Yeah.
TN: So people are going to have to rein in their behaviors because we’re likely at new pricing levels for many things. And so that consumption is going to have to decline a bit to adjust to the new environment. Albert, you had a comment?
AM: Yeah, two comments, actually. The thing about the demand destruction and the supply, from the Fed’s point of view, they think that getting rid of demand involves eliminating supply. Right. So that a little bit has to do with the rates, but also what Mike said about doom loop. I mean, that’s very interesting because that’s exactly what we were talking about in multiple areas, not just for bonds, but Yellen herself, she’s had her minions go out in the bond market and just straight up lie to bondholders, saying, oh, they’ll recover, they’ll recover while everyone keeps buying, and they just keep butchering the long bond.
The 30 years just been 3.1 today or 3.5. It’s crazy. She did this in 2013 where she had this little ploy where she has preventing capital flight, leaving the United States in order to prop up the US equity markets. And that’s what we’re seeing today. And this doom loop between the Fed and the treasury, because they’re not on the same page. They’ve got different policies, different ideas of how to keep the market, and it’s causing problems.
MG: I would actually add to that and just highlight that this is, of course, the downside to not having people who actually have ever traded or negotiated a swap or done anything else along those lines in positions of decision making. You don’t want to put a fox in charge of the hen house. But the reality is it is somewhat useful in terms of understanding what’s actually transpiring. It doesn’t surprise me at all that Janet Yellen says something along the lines of, well, there’s no sign of a recession because they’re working very first order, first derivative type dynamics. It’s that second and even potentially third derivative that ultimately conveys the dynamics of what’s really happening.
And the second part is that the Fed operates under a model in which negative real interest rates, which is basically a function of inflation expectations and the current level of yield. Some people roughly approximate it with trailing inflation and current yield, which is completely insane. But at least if you’re doing it in a structural fashion, they tend to presume that the only reason why markets move is due to information.
The market has some insight, and this has been one of the huge policy innovations. And I use “innovations” over the last 20 years has been this dynamic of, okay, well, if we’re trying to figure out market expectations, let’s use market inputs. But those market inputs in turn respond to the policy makers. Right?
TN: Right.
MG: And there’s all sorts of structural features to markets. If I happen to short a pay or swap shop, for example, and my risk manager is forcing me to cover that risk, it has no economic signal to it. It’s simply a market feature that they are then trying to interpret as indicative of underlying demand. That’s just wrong.
TN: Right.
AM: On top of that, you have a political component where Yellen tied to a certain party or not just Yellen but others tied to a certain party are going to do things beneficial to that party.
I know economists and financial guys don’t like to hear that, but that’s just the reality of it.
TN: That’s the reality of national accounts. We also mentioned the dollar wrecking ball. We’ve seen over the past week, Yen devaluation or Yen depreciation. We’ve seen CNY devaluation. CNY has gone from, I think, 6.34 to 6.49, which is a dramatic deval of CNY. How much of an impact does the dollar have on those markets, particularly because we’ve heard about the dollar losing influence for the past, I don’t know, 50 years. But talk to us, Albert, what’s going on there?
AM: Like I said, Yellen wants to restrict capital flight, and a strong dollar does that. It’s killing the emerging markets. They gave Japan the go ahead to devalue the yen in order to offset anything that China does asymmetrically against the United States, because they have been. They’ve been in a little bit of a tit for tat for quite some time now.
So the dollar at 110 just absolutely annihilates emerging markets, except for the markets that are commodity based, like Canada. I’ve been in Canada. I love the Canadian economy right now. It’s strong oil based, gold based. So that’s where I’m coming from on the dollar right now.
TN: Great. Okay.
MG: I would just broadly highlight but by the way, I don’t know if you saw the CNY today, but it moved huge again today. So it’s actually now 6.50. Well, fantastic in the same way that like a root canal is fantastic. Right. But yes, it’s a wonderful technology. Nobody wants to experience it.
But just to put this in context, this is a move now that is equivalent in terms of devaluation of what we saw in August of 2015, in terms of the much-heralded… Right. And I would just highlight that I think this is an important move. I think it’s telling you that there’s all sorts of stuff that’s going on. I tend to fall into the category of terms of trade dynamics, more so than interest rates or even anything, those dynamics.
Japan allowing its currency depreciate, leading to depreciation for the Chinese currency or contributing to depreciation for the Chinese currency. They want a competitive in global export markets. Right. So there’s an element of China needing to respond and maintaining competitiveness versus a significant devaluation that’s occurred in the Japanese yen, which is basically, if you think about it from an American perspective, means I can buy 30% more of what a Japanese worker produces today than I could a year ago. Not quite exactly. Right. But somewhere in that range.
The second part of it, though, is that the terms of trade have just turned so ugly for these countries where the things that they need to import, they have incredible food insecurity, they have incredible energy insecurity, and those are the things that are rising in price. And we’re seeing no signs that those are going to retreat, whether it’s LNG that Japan now has to compete with China in Europe or from the United States and elsewhere or whether it’s wheat or rice or corn.
I believe, Albert you may know this better than I do but I believe Malaysia just announced export restrictions on palm oil, worried about their own food security. This is the way the system breaks down. And the irony of course is the US, are we going to get unlimited palm oil imports? Of course not. But can we use soybean oil or canola oil in lieu of palm oil for frying our Twinkies and our food? Of course. Right. We can do that. The US can survive almost anything from a food or energy shortage standpoint. It’s the rest of the world.
Albert referenced the emerging markets. I mean man, if you are a cash crop producing emerging market that is now struggling with issues around food and energy security, this is going to get bad. It’s really bad.
AM: It’s really bad. It’s causing political uncertainty in many regions of the world. And again use the phrase doom loop because politicians over Covid policies have created a doom loop in trade.
TN: But let me ask you and we need to wrap up this topic but I want to take this full circle because it’s fascinating. With the currency devaluation depreciation in China, Japan and the food issues could that potentially push, say, North Asia to put more pressure on Russia to wrap up the conflict so that the commodities out of Russia and Ukraine can alleviate some of this price pressure on emerging markets. Is that a possibility?
AM: It’s a possibility, but I think it’s a small possibility. Things have changed because of the Ukrainians sinking that battleship. They got bears at that point.
But Interestingly though, now that you mentioned, I just thought of it. Japan and China have always competed for the fishing rights and then sea Japan. So you could see a future. Want to say naval skirmish but a couple of boats taking some live firearounds.
TN: Sure. Yeah. Or a mistake. Right. You could have a mistake that results in something like that. Okay, let’s move on to tech. I think we can talk about this issue for hours.
AM: Yeah.
TN: Let’s move on to tech. Robert, we’ve spoken about key to earnings for a while, expecting them generally weaker, partly on inflation and other pressures. But this week we saw Snapchat miss earnings, but they reported 64% revenue growth and their active users were up 20%. So their business seems to be going well. Netflix lost subscribers and we saw them kind of as the tech cautionary tale. Facebook is falling in anticipation of their earnings for next week. On the bright side, Tesla saw a 42% earnings surprise, but their stock, after moving up a bit, really hasn’t moved much.
So on screen, we’ve got Facebook and Snapchat kind of showing their downward trajectory over the past month. So can you talk us through kind of what’s happening with tech earnings? Is that a rotation? Is tech really out of gas? What’s going on there?
AM: I believe tech is out of gas. A lot of it has to do with inflation and rates and whatnot. But I think tech earnings had gone into the stratosphere when Covid was just blazing because of the lockdown. People stayed at home, got on Snapchat, got on Facebook, got on Google and whatnot. Right.
The Tesla earnings. Those are a joke. It sounded like Tesla is the most efficient automaker in the world, which is absolutely a joke when they’re making cars intense. And it took the market up like 70 points. And then as soon as some of the better analysts started digging through the information, immediately sold off again. And then that actually triggered, I think that triggered the market to sell-off a little bit because people are worried about tech earning. I think Google’s going to miss big because their brick and mortar advertising scheme is hurting. Last month and this month it doesn’t look pretty.
But I want to take some caution here because everyone’s going to get beared up on these tech earnings as everyone’s seen the Huawei, big puts coming out there and whatnot. But we’ve seen time and again these tech earnings missed on revenue. And then the guidance is fantastic and the market rips 200 points in a week. I don’t want to be short tech at this level right now.
TN: Right. Mike, what are your thoughts?
MG: The obvious component is that we’ve got extraordinarily difficult compares for most of the tech companies. Right. So you go into a pandemic and every kid needs a computer, every kid needs a cell phone, every kid needs that. And I’m speaking to you over a microphone that was purchased during the pandemic and a computer that was purchased during the pandemic and a video camera that was purchased during the pandemic. Right. And I upgraded my software and my kids got new phones and all this sort of stuff that all occurred. Well, guess what? It’s not happening now. That’s harder.
And when I think about the reinvestment that needs to occur as we talk about going back into the office and into work, et cetera, it’s much less on the soft side. It’s much more on the simple dynamics of how do we restock a pantry at a company cafeteria. Right. Which hasn’t had to happen for a while.
TN: Right.
MG: So I am generally skeptical of it. I’m particularly concerned about the consumer side of it. One of my friends many years ago had highlighted that the emergence of cell phones as a consumer good had by and large, replace lots of other types of spending. So it reduced clothes, reduced spending on everything else. People are now tapped out on buying those phones. Right? They’re out of money and they’re using their credit in one form or another. So I’m skeptical on particularly Apple.
I agree with Albert, by the way, on Google. I think people are underestimating the importance of the bricks and mortar, and they’re also underestimating. I think this is one of the challenges for the Netflix. I’ll be 100% straight with you in terms of my household’s reaction to it. I mentioned it to my wife. She’s like, well, we’re obviously switching to the advertising supported model as soon as that becomes available because, candidly, I don’t even like watching Netflix to begin with. I could care less. If I have to watch ads and get it for $10 as compared to $20, then I would argue that this is happening broadly.
As we move back to an advertising supported model, the inventory of advertising space is about to explode at the exact same time that demand is relatively weak. So who thinks we’re going to get premium prices for advertising anymore? These models are screwy in terms of how badly they could deteriorate. If you simultaneously have a boom in advertising space at the exact same time that demand is relatively short.
TN: But lucky us, we get more campaign ads until November.
Okay, great, guys. Moving on to commodities. We saw commodities pretty much get smoked in the last half of this week. We’ve got one month history of WTI and copper up on the screen. So what happened this week, and what should we be thinking about right now with respect to commodities?
AM: I think that in terms of commodities, I think the biggest component right now is to see what happens in the Ukraine war, whether Russia stops because the Europeans and the Biden administration is using that as like the Putin price hike and whatever. But that’s what they’re blaming it all on. And a lot of people are worried about this being an extended war. I don’t think it’s going to last more than another month or two.
But for commodities, especially wheat and fertilizer, the moment that Ukraine comes back online, those things are just nosedived. And the Fed wants that to nose dive because they’re trying to kill supply in order to tackle inflation. So that’s from my perspective, there.
TN: So a lot of this at this point, you think depends on Russia, Ukraine.
AM: Yeah. That and the dollar. That and the dollar. So the dollar goes up, prices will come down.
TN: Okay. So appreciated dollar, did that hurt commodity prices this week?
AM: I think so. Go ahead, Michael.
MG: Yeah. So they’re not quite inverse. But remember, when we see prices, we’re seeing our prices, we’re not seeing the rest of the world’s prices. And exactly to the point that we were raising before with Japan and everything else on a year to day basis, as much as you may think, oil prices are up in the United States, they’re up maybe 50% in the United States. They’re up 100% if you’re in Japan. Oil prices 100% on a year to day basis.
AM: Wow. Right.
MG: I mean, that’s just an extraordinary outcome. You’re looking at these kind of underlying characteristics, and you have to say to yourself, the rest of the world is going to start to experience significant declines in aggregate demand.
Forget the supply component that Albert is highlighting. Focus much more on the demand. And when we think about commodities, developed world demand is extraordinarily efficient. We don’t throw copper on the ground. We don’t discard it into landfills. We recycle copper. Right. We recycle aluminum. We clean up the sludge off of our factory floors. That doesn’t happen in most places around the world. Right. Scrap found out in the open is still a significant fraction of aggregate supply. So we just use it more efficiently.
As things shift back here, we’re going to become more efficient at it. And I got a lot of heat earlier this week for posting a chart that said, look, I’m not seeing this commodity super cycle. I’ll say I’m not seeing this commodity super cycle. I don’t see the underlying outward shift in aggregate demand in almost any commodity that says we’re going to have truly sustained high levels of inflation and need for significant additional production other than effectively the disaggregating of supply chains. And you’ll hear things like huge copper demand because of electric vehicles. Right. That is selling human innovation so short, it’s just ridiculous.
If copper prices go higher, we’ll figure out how to use less copper wiring. That’s the history of the world.
TN: Right.
AM: That’s absolutely correct. That’s when they started using, like, gold flakes and sprays and different types of adhesive made out of whatever.
TN: But it generally takes a big demographic change to enter a commodity super-cycle or some sort of supply cut-off, right?
AM: Yeah. I can see a super-cycle within one or two commodities peaking and then coming back down and another one peaking and coming back down. But this insane super cycle that people were expecting, I don’t think it can happen. I agree with Mike.
TN: Okay, great. Let’s switch gears and look at the week ahead. Guys, we talked a little bit about housing, but we’ve got a bunch of housing metrics coming out next week with Case Shiller and a few other things. Because of rate rises, do you guys expect to see a near term impact on house prices? Are we kind of in a wait and see mode? What do you think is happening there.
AM: Politically? The Democrats want housing to come down. Right. And I think some of this bond action is meant to do that to be honest with you. I think they want houses down in the 30 year up. These prices, these housing prices are insane. It just stuns me to see some of these homes going for 150% of what they were two years ago.
And at some point the buyers are going to dry up. I mean, these cash buyers are going to dry up. And the credit now, I think in Tampa, it’s like over 6% for a 30-year mortgage. It’s going to make it even more unaffordable.
TN: But how much does that have to do with housing supply? Are we seeing more supplies coming on the market?
MG: Well, we are seeing more supply of new homes because the delays in completion means that homes that were ordered 18 months ago are finally starting to show up on the market. And that’s been one of the challenges. Unlike what we saw in 2005, 2006. This is not a function of massive amounts of new housing being built in areas that previously did not have housing.
So the character of 2004, 5, 6 was effectively converting farms and semi rural environments into subdivisions of endless numbers of homes that look identical so that people could have a home and then drive an hour to their work or an hour and a half. I mean, that was just crazy.And that was killed by the spike in oil prices that occurred with Hurricane Katrina and Ivan.
This time around, you just have a shortage of supply in terms of people willing to move. And unfortunately, the increase in interest rates, paradoxically, can exacerbate that. Right. Because I don’t want to leave my house and buy a new house because I have to enter into a new mortgage. Right. Of the mortgage. So, perversely, this could end up preventing supply from coming onto the market because when I go to look to replace my home, I can’t do it. And so it’s not clear to me that prices are going to take the hit that people are looking for.
I think at the low end, you’ll see certainly some pressure on new homes. You’ll see some pressure. But perversely, that just exacerbates the problem. Right. If new homes get hit more than existing homes, guess what? We’ll get less new homes.
TN: Okay, great. So far, it’s a very positive show, which is fantastic. End of a rough week into a rough show.
Let’s talk a minute about the French election, guys. It’s next week, what do you expect to happen in markets, say, with the Euro and French equities.
AM: Yeah, actually, we ended up buying the Euro today, looking for Macron to win reelection. Everyone that sees my Twitter feed knows I’m a conservative. Le Pen is a disaster for France, for Europe, transatlantic relations with the United States. She just can’t win and she won’t win. But the thing is, a lot of people think that she’s going to win.
So I think the Euro is going to probably pop half percent, maybe even percent, come Sunday into Monday. And then the dollar might actually come down and the market might actually rally a little bit crazy.
MG: I’m certainly sympathetic to that. I mean, the degree of sell off that we have seen, everything ranging from the yen to the Euro, et cetera, it’s hard to sustain this type of momentum. Ultimately, I’m exceptionally bearish on Europe. I’m exceptionally bearish on Japan for reasons that are largely unrelated to the immediacy of it.
I agree with Albert, and I actually would highlight something that he said that is really important for people to understand. When you describe yourself as a conservative, most people would say, okay, Marine Le Pen is a conservative. Right. Because she represents anti immigration and she represents behave more like French people. Right. But the reality is conservatism is all about let’s not break the system and try to replace it with some utopian vision. Right. Let’s try to work within the existing system to make it better.
When you enter into periods of uncertainty like what we’re experiencing, there’s a reason why the incumbent almost always wins, because people don’t want radical change in their lives. It makes it far more difficult. And so I just am not seeing any evidence that Le Pen has the chance that she’s claimed to and not that I want to join Albert on the potential tinfoil hat conspiracy standpoint, but I agree with them. I don’t think she’d be allowed to win.
TN: Okay, interesting. So a little bit of stability in Europe, which is great.
Guys, let’s have a quick geopolitical lightning round. I know there’s a lot going on in Russia, China, Ukraine, elsewhere. What’s on your mind, Albert, when you talk to your politics, what are you talking about the most?
AM: Honestly, China. The civil unrest in Shanghai, that’s actually looking like it’s spreading is kind of really concerning. For years, Xi’s been holed up in bunkers and can’t go.
You know, China, Tony. I mean, you have 1.3 billion people mad at you. You just don’t go out. Xi has this problem at the moment. So for me, it’s the civil unrest in Shanghai spreading to Guangdong and even outwards.
MG: Wait a second. So XI has 1.3 billion people mad at him? Did he say something against Bitcoin? Sorry.
AM: That would be 2.3 billion people because all of India is there too.
MG: 1.4 billion people. But yeah, exactly. You get really mad about that, as I’ve discovered.
Now, listen, I completely agree with Albert that, and this is again, part of the great irony of everything that’s been going on and I’m somewhat guilty of this myself looking at the dynamics of Russia and the moves that they were making and I think both Albert and I would still come to the conclusion says they’re going to take Ukraine and they’re going to take it in a much more violent fashion because now they’re really pissed.
TN: Yes.
MG: But the simple reality is that I think most people had described a degree of competence to Putin and Russia that has now become very clear that the authoritarian and central planning tendencies associated with that style of governance has its flaws. People are slowly waking up to this.
They’re now beginning to see this in China where it’s like well, wait a second. Maybe Xi’s not planning for the next 100 years. Maybe XI’s planning for the next two days to figure out where… without getting killed.
TN: That’s exactly it, Mike and I’ve been saying that to people for years. China does not think in centuries these guys are making it up as they go along. I’ve been inside the bureaucracy. I know it. They’re making it up as they go along.
So you hit it right on the head. They’re planning for the next two days or two months. They’re not planning for the next 200 years.
AM: Yeah. And the Chinese, they’re quite practical but it’s just too big of a country. I mean, there’s so many different regions and dialect. How do you keep something that big cohesive manner? You don’t.
TN: It’s hard. It’s a collection. It’s like the EU or four of the EU. But it’s very complex for one guy to manage. So guys, thanks very much for that. I really appreciate it and have a great weekend. Thank you very much.
Here’s a special promotion for the Week Ahead listeners: 90% off CI Futures (Complete Intelligence’s market data and forecast platform.) https://www.completeintel.com/promo
CI Futures forecasts approximately 800 assets across commodities, currencies and equity indices and a couple thousand economic variables for the top 50 economies.
CI Futures tracks forecast error for accountable performance. Users can see exactly how CI forecasts have performed historically at 1 and 3 month forward intervals.
Yield curve inversion is on everybody’s mind and it only seems to be intensifying. It’s happened 4 times over the last 22 years. What does it mean, how does it impact Fed policy and how will it impact markets more broadly?
Energy prices are still a big problem and the Biden administration this week announced a very large release from the strategic petroleum reserve. Will this really bring down prices on a sustained basis? And what are some of the unintended consequences of the SPR release?
We’ve seen tech names rally pretty hard since mid-March like Alphabet and Meta. What’s happening and how long will the tech rally last?
Key themes from last week
Inverted yield curve and Fed policy
SPR release and crude market impacts
Tech’s comeback?
Key themes for the Week Ahead
Rubles for O&G. When will Europe give in?
Housing stocks and the housing market
Mixed messages of simultaneous stimulus and tightening (rate hikes with energy stimulus)
This is the 13th episode of The Week Ahead in collaboration of Complete Intelligence with Intelligence Quarterly, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.
0:00 Start 1:00 Key themes of last week 1:29 What the yield curve means and how it impacts the Fed policy 4:50 The Fed has to break something? 6:33 Large release from SPR, will this bring down the crude prices? 8:30 Viewer question: Will Biden’s threat to US drillers produce the desired results? 12:19 Tech rally? 14:16 Key themes for the week ahead. 14:44 How long before Europe pays ruble for oil and gas? 18:52 Home builders VS real estate 21:00 What do people read from tightening, easing, and all the stimulus?
TN: Hi and welcome to The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. I’m joined by Albert Marko, Sam Rines and Tracy Shuchart. Thanks for joining us. Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel. Also, want to let you know about CI Futures, our subscription product. We cover thousands of assets and economic concepts on CI Futures. Our forecasts are refreshed every weekend. You come in Monday morning and have a brand new forecast each week. Right now we’re offering a special subscription price of $50 a month. Please go to completeintel.com/promo and find out more.
So this week we had a few key themes. First is the inverted yield curve curve and Fed policy. Second is the SPR release and crude market. And the third is around tech. Is there a comeback in tech?
Sam, you’re up first. Let’s talk about the yield curve. It’s on everyone’s mind and it only seems to be intensifying. It’s happened four times over the last 22 years. So Albert and Sam, can you help us understand what does it mean? How does it impact Fed policy? Are they going to be more cautious going forward and how will it import markets more broadly?
AM: Well, Tony, concerning the inverting the yield curve, Jerome Powell doesn’t really want to do that. However, Janet Yellen does want to invert the yield curve. This is the divide that’s been throwing off the market analyst for quite a long time, quite a while now, actually, myself and I just found out and realized where the divide was. And normally in a deep quad for to take something from hedgeeye’s commentary, the only things that you can buy are Treasuries and gold. And right now Powell will be fighting a tide because of the long dated treasure is the number one thing to own in that scenario. So trying to protect stocks while hurting housing, and then you have Yellen that’s trying to protect housing. It’s quite a mess. And it’s probably something like Sam can actually detail the inverted yield curve on.
TN: So why are there are two camps just to go into that down that trail for a second?
AM: Well, it’s a policy, it’s ideology, basically. Yellen did this before in 2013, 2014, I believe. And Powell is not really an economist. He’s a lawyer. So he’s probably hearing it from his little circle of miscreants. So that’s where that’s coming from.
TN: People, whoever is listening.
AM: I’m sure they’re fine people. I’m sure they are. I think Yellen is probably correct in this instance, but we’ll see how that plays out.
TN: Okay, Sam, what do you think?
SR: Yeah, in inverted yield curve, generally, everybody’s like, hey, recession on the horizon. In reality, yeah. I mean, there’s always a recession at some point on the horizon. And what the yield curve tells you is that there’s one coming in the future. No kidding. But it’s not good for one timing, a recession period.
TN: So we’ve got the 2/10 spread on the screen right now. So can you tell us what does that mean and how much importance does that hold with that two and ten yield spread going negative?
SR: I mean, it’s something to pay attention to. I mean, the market is telling you something with that. There is some signal, even if there’s noise in there as well, that the Fed is going to go very, very quickly and is likely to break housing or break something else or break housing and something else. And that’s going to probably cause inflation to come back down. Right.
The market does not believe that or at least fixed income market does not believe that inflation is going to be a problem in ten years, does not believe that the Fed is going to be able to hold interest rates very high for very long. And that’s why you get the 2/10s inverted. Right. The Fed is going to go above what the “natural rate or the stall rate” is for the US economy.
TN: Right. So we’ve been saying for several weeks the demand destruction is the only way that the Fed is going to solve supply side inflation. And the last couple of weeks you’ve talked about the Fed breaking something at this point, the Fed almost has to break something. Right? I mean, Volker broke something in the early 80s. Right. Something has to be broken.
SR: Yes. Something has to be broken or you’re not going to solve the inflation issue. And you have to do it. You have to do it in a pretty rapid manner of tightening in order to get the inflation levels that we have now back to something somewhat reasonable in a time frame that is adequate. But again, it doesn’t tell you what’s going to break. We talked about it last week. Housing looks sick. Housing equities look sick. It does not look great, but it doesn’t tell you much about the broader market. Right. It’s a lot of noise. You can say that it’s bad for equities, but generally it takes a while for it to be bad for equities.
TN: Okay, great. Now, JPMorgan put out a note this week. Everyone’s putting out notes about when rates are going to rise. They said 50 in May 50 in June. Are you thinking that or is that kind of on the edge of aggressive?
SR: I mean, it’s aggressive, but the Fed has very little choice but to be aggressive in this instance or it’s going to lose credibility further. And that’s an issue for it. Right. It doesn’t want to lose that little bit of credibility it has left to raising rates too slowly in an environment where it’s getting the green light to do so from markets. Markets have it priced in. Why not do it?
TN: Yeah. If someone said in January that we’d be raising 50 in May, 50 in June, I think you’d be laughed at. But now it’s taken seriously. So it’s just really interesting to see the iteration of that expectations.
Okay. Speaking of inflation, let’s move on to energy prices. Tracy, obviously, there’s still a big problem. And this week, the Biden administration announced a very large release from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. You’ve been all over this, including the Tweet you sent out on Thursday, which is on our screen talking about logistical issues.
So the main question I think for most people is will this bring down oil prices on a sustainable basis? So can you talk to us about that and some of the unintended consequences of the SPR release?
TS: Yeah, absolutely. It’s not enough to keep oil prices sustainably lower. Right. It doesn’t fix the structural supply deficit that we have years to come. Also, this slows shale growth because it disincentivizes shale producers from drilling more, which actually needs to be done and also creates potential logistical bottlenecks because we’ve never released this much before. That could cause congestion on the Gulf Coast. And that Tweet is up I think, talking about the bottlenecks there.
And then there’s another issue that has not been discussed yet broadly. And that’s because the SPR is aging. Right. And so we’ve had releases before where we’ve seen degradation in oil. And in 2015, they approved the $2 billion upgrade to the SPR, which is not going to be done until 2025. That said, what they did is they did everything except for the distribution centers. So what will happen is we need to see if we can actually get a million barrels per day pushed through. So there’s a lot of obstacles here.
TN: So it’s a sentimental kind of downside for oil right now. Nothing’s really released yet. And it doesn’t seem all that feasible that it’ll come out soon. Right. So supply chain issues like we’re seeing everywhere else.
So we had a viewer question from @VandanaHari_SG. It says, to what extent will Biden’s threat to us drillers to drill or get off the lease, produce desired results? You mentioned Frackers earlier. Will we see much movement there?
TS: No. Biden did call for Congress to make this decision. Personally, I do not believe that this will actually get passed by Congress. That said, again, this disincentivizes oil companies from producing more because it’s not that easy to just turn on wells. They’re facing labor shortages. They’re facing supply chain shortages. It’s not that easy to do that.
So if you tell them we’re going to tax you on this, then if they abandon those wells, then it’s going to take that much longer to get them back online when they are ready to. So all in all, it’s a horrible idea. Again, I do not see Congress passing this whatsoever.
TN: It’s complicated. And I think that’s the thing that we live in a world that likes to simplify things a lot. Right. And we like to say we’re going to do X, we’re going to do Y, we’re going to do Z. And the implementation of this stuff seems to be a lot more complicated Than we hear from, say, these non experts that talk to us all day long on TV or social media.
TS: Exactly. I mean…
TN: We can’t just wave a wand fixed supply.
TS: And turn on oil wells. I mean, regardless, we run through our DUC supply. Right. And that’s why we’re seeing slower oil production. The monthly EIA monthly just came out yesterday. It was 11.37 million barrels instead of 11.6 million that they were estimating in the weekly. And so what happens is that you’re pulling down DUC wells, which are the ones that you can get up easily, and then you’re putting all these restraints on oil companies and threatening them with taxes and things of that nature.
To get a well online from start to finish is six to twelve months. People don’t realize it’s not let’s snap our fingers and tomorrow we’re spreading oil.
TN: It’s not exactly a nudge. Right? Remember, under the Obama administration, they really focused on condomin and the nudge and all that stuff. This is kind of the opposite of that. It’s like the bludgeon.
TN: Yeah, exactly.
TS: Doing what they want. Right. Sorry. Go ahead.
AM: No, this is just political rhetoric. I mean, they’re better off just jumping into the oil futures market and trying to drive it down. This is just talk by the Biden administration. There’s really no substance to it.
TN: Can they jump into the futures market and short it and drive the price down?
AM: Who says they haven’t? Okay. You’re looking at 127 price and all of a sudden it’s down in the 90s. Is this crypto crude? What are we doing here?
TN: Okay, that’s a good point. All right.
SR: Just one last point to that. I know Tracy actually think Tracy tweeted this out a couple of weeks ago. The latest Dallas Fed survey of oil companies made it pretty clear that a lot of them at no, they don’t care where the prices. They’re not increasing their output. They put that on paper and put that in the survey. I think that’s worth remembering is that this is a less price sensitive reaction than people are going to give credit for.
TS: 100%.
AM: Yes.
TN: Okay, great, guys. That’s fantastic. Let’s move on to equities. Albert, we’ve seen tech stocks rallied pretty hard for the last couple of weeks since about March 14th. We’ve got chart for Alphabet and Facebook on the screen right now. Sorry. Meta on the screen right now. What’s happening to tech? What’s happened over the last couple of weeks and how long do you expect them to rally?
AM: Well, they’ve used tech, maybe a dozen names to rally the market. This is well known. I mean, if you look at those names that you have listed along with AMD, Nvidia and Adobe, they can be up to 30, 40% of the call action on a given day. It’s kind of silly, but honestly, it’s like this is a zero rate economy at the moment. So as our rates go up. Yeah. So as our rates go up, I don’t see how tech is going to rally much further.
TN: Okay, Go ahead.
TS: I’ll just throw in that just because BAMO came out with their weekly flows that we’ve had, tech market was $3.1 billion, which is the highest in two months.
TN: Okay. Interesting. All right. So if we go with the note that came out that in May and June will see 50 basis point rises, and you’re saying tech can’t continue to rally into higher interest rates, are you saying we’re looking at that type of horizon for tech to not be as attractive?
AM: Yeah, unless they reverse course come June or July. I don’t see how tech can really rally to what their all time highs were a couple of months. I don’t see it.
TN: Sam, does that make sense to you?
SR: It does make sense to me. I think the only saving grace for tech thus far has been that the long end of the curve hasn’t done much, and it actually looks a little sick at the moment in terms of yield. And that’s been a little bit of a semi tailwind, at least prop them up.
TN: Great. Okay, perfect. Let’s look at the week ahead. Some things we have for the week ahead are rubles for oil and gas. When will Europe give in? Housing stocks and the housing market? Sam mentioned that earlier. We’ll dive a little deeper into that and then the mixed messages around simultaneous stimulus and tightening, which I think is confusing some people.
So first, let’s dive into rubles for oil and gas. I did a quick Twitter survey earlier, which is up on your screen asking people how long before Europe caves and pays for oil and gas and rubles. Something like 70% of people think they’ll do that within two weeks. It’s just a Twitter survey. Some of those guys are experts. Some of those aren’t. Tracy, what do you think? Is that realistic?
TS: Putin actually came out today and said this is the plan. There is no backing out. However, it doesn’t include what you pretty much already bought. That means. So deliveries until most delivery until April 15, and then really in May 1 is where that really starts, where Europe will really have to start paying in rubles.
TN: So May 1 is when you think the rubles?
TS: May 1 is really when the bulk of this situation will come in hand because it’s not for what has already been ordered. Right.
TN: Okay.
TS: Does that make sense?
TN: You think we could see a trickle in mid April?
TS: Yeah, exactly. But I think that they’re going to have to do that. They really have no other choice unless they kind of want to plunge into the dark ages. Right there’s just not the backup plan is forming, but it’s just not there yet. So I think that they will concede even though they have a little bit of a time. They have 15 to 30 days to really. But you can’t move that fast. It’s not that easy to change suppliers that quickly.
TN: But we’ve talked about this a little bit. But what happens to say industrial output? German manufacturing if they decide not to do this? To be honest, it sounds like a pretty trivial thing to me to pay in another currency. There is a transaction cost to it. But if you’ve got a major economy, it doesn’t sound like something that you can really stand by insisting to pay in dollars. So what happens to German manufacturing? What happens to industrial cost Europe.
TS: It’ll actually plummet. I mean, BASF already came out and said we’re going to have to cut production if this happens. The German plan is basically to shut down manufacturing and to give residential the leeway if they have to start rationing. So that means if manufacturing starts shutting down in Europe, you’re in recession territory immediately.
AM: Yeah. They’ll find a way. They’ll find some special vehicle to sort this out. They got a little bit of time, like Tracy said, they got about two months really to sort this out. And anyways, the weather is starting to get warmer, so the less gas will be used. Anyway, I don’t see this to be really of a big problem. It’s just a lot of noise and a little bit of leverage from Russia on the sanctions that they are getting hit by well.
TN: But conceivably because of the embargoes on some of the banks in Russia, it could be a real issue with having funds rubles in Russian banks. No?
AM: I don’t think so. They can go between the Swiss, London will do it. It’s the same thing as the Yuan, renminbi, it’s like when they trade it for oil, the Saudis sell it in renminbi and goes to London, gets converted instantly and it’s dollars almost immediately to the seller. So I don’t think it’s going to be a problem.
TS: I 100% agree that the currency doesn’t really matter because it’s still factored into what is the dollar value. Right. It doesn’t really matter or any in Europe’s case, what is Euro per megawatt hour?
Regardless, it’s not really the currency that matters so much. The fact is the currency is helping. What Russia is trying to do is that if you have to sell euros to buy rubles, that keeps the currency afloat.
TN: Right. Which we’ve seen it surge back this week to pre war levels. Okay, great. Let’s move on to homes and home builders. Sam, you mentioned the housing market and housing stocks earlier, and we’ve got on the screen a chart about US real estate and home builders and the divergence between those. And they’re usually pretty correlated. Can you talk us through your expectations for real estate relative to where homebuilders are trading right now?
SR: They’ll look like homebuilders pretty quickly here. It’s what the Fed is basically able to do in terms of the economy quickly. Right. If you’re going to tighten rates by two and a half percent in a year, plus quantitative tightening, that’s what you’re going to hit. You’re going to hit home builders and real estate. That’s generally what you’re going to hit and you’re going to hit it fast.
In particular, the shorter duration type real estate that’s benefited the most from zero rates. If the long end of the curve stays somewhat subdued, you’re probably fine if you have longer duration type retail or that type of lease. But the shorter term duration real estate type plays are going to be in some trouble here.
TN: Okay. And so you say it’s going to happen pretty quickly. Last week you said it’s going to happen in Q2. When I first heard that, I was a little bit surprised. But just seeing what’s happened over the past week, it’s been really surprising to me that things have moved so quickly. So I think you’re right. I’m really interested to see that happen.
Now. You also mentioned QT. So let’s talk a little bit about kind of the tightening and easing, the simultaneous tightening and easing that we have going on. And how do we expect that to move over the next week? So, Sam, you’ve been pretty insistent that QT is going to start in May, is that right?
SR: Oh, yes. Little doubt.
TN: Definitely going to start in May. Now we’ve got countries and States giving energy stimulus and other things happening. I wouldn’t be surprised if different forms of stimulus come out. So how does it work where we have really fairly significant stimulus coming out as we’re tightening? What do people read from that?
SR: I would say confusion. Right. If you’re trying to actually tackle if you’re trying to tackle inflation with monetary policy, that really has to break something in order to get it under control, and yet you’re giving people more leeway to not have something break more money in their pockets. It’s counterproductive. Right. So you begin to either have to tighten more or tighten quicker or both to get it under control or you have to stop it with the fence full fiscal.
TN: What are you hearing about that Albert out of DC?
AM: I was on this program. When was it? About a year ago, talking about tapering with Andreas, and I was against tapering. I never think it was going to happen, but because the fact that we just keep going on QE, how do you tighten when you have QE and the Fed balance sheet is still expanding by 100 billion plus a week. I mean, that’s not.
This is why there’s so much confusion in the market. Like Sam was saying, it’s just you talk about tightening. Meanwhile, you secretly spend $160 billion to pump the market. So which one is it? As an analyst, how do you even assess what you’re going to do over the next 30 days when the Fed’s confused? The Fed and Treasury is confused.
TN: So can we have that where we’re say doing tightening but helping equity markets continue to rise?
TS: I mean, is that just weird? Of course it does. It is weird. You can’t have monetary policy going head to head with fiscal policy. Right. So you’re having fiscal policy loosening. At least let’s look at the energy markets right now. You can’t have all of this stimulus and it’s not just from the United States. It’s from across the world is doing this and we’re going to see more of this every week of new countries come out and save money.
TN: Not in Japan. Japan is easing across the board.
TS: Yeah.
TN: Everyone else.
TS: True. But of course, I agree completely with the Sam said it’s confusion in the markets because you are literally having central banks butting heads with governments right now.
AM: Yeah. And that’s something people don’t really pay attention to. It’s not simply the US federal reserve with the US economy, but it’s the federal reserve with all of anglesphere. They can have the Canadians or the UK do tightening while we do expansion and vice versa. They can do it unending. It’s unbelievable.
TN: So when do we know the direction? When do we know whether we’re tightening or easing? Do we come to a point like is May the end point for easing?
AM: I don’t know, Tony. I can’t really tell you that because they can say that they’re doing that and then we find out two months later that they didn’t do it and they can use all sorts of weird little gimmicks that they have control over.
TN: Okay, Sam, what do you think?
SR: I think the comment about the Anglosphere was really interesting because it’s 100% true, right. If you look at a lot of the EMS, they’ve been talking lightning for a year or at least nine months. So I think that’s the really intriguing kind of comment for me is the US is probably so late to the game that EM is going to be easing by the time the Fed actually accomplishes any sort of tightening.
TS: They’ll have to, they will have to.
SR: Which sets something interesting up, by the way.
TN: Sorry.
SR: Which sets something interesting up for when that happens. But that’s down the road.
TN: It really does. Yeah. Remember synchronized easing and synchronized tightening a decade ago? I just feel we have so many mixed messages out there that it’s no wonder we have the volatility that we have in market. Okay. Thanks very much for this. I really appreciate it. Have a great week ahead.
We’ve seen so much about oil for rubles, gas for bitcoin, etc this week. Does it represent a fundamental shift for energy markets? And is the dollar dead? The yen fell pretty hard versus the dollar this week. Why is that happening, especially if the dollar is dead? Bonds spike pretty hard this week, especially the 5-year. What’s going on there and what does it mean?
Key themes from last week:
Oil for rubles (death of the Dollar?)
Rapidly depreciating JPY
Hawkish Fed and the soaring 5-year
Key themes for The Week Ahead:
New stimulus coming to help pay for energy. Inflationary?
How hawkish can the Fed go?
What’s ahead for equity markets?
This is the 12th episode of The Week Ahead in collaboration of Complete Intelligence with Intelligence Quarterly, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.
0:00 Start 0:34 CI Futures 1:22 Key themes this week 1:48 Oil for rubles (death of the Dollar?) 3:15 Acceptance of cryptocurrency? 5:34 Petrodollar Petroyuan? 7:32 Rapidly depreciating JPY 10:12 Hawkish Fed and the soaring 5-year 11:58 Housing is done? 13:10 Stimulus for energy 15:53 How hawkish can the Fed go? 17:34 What’s ahead for equity markets?
Transcript
TN: Hi, everyone, and welcome to The Week Ahead. My name is Tony Nash. I’m here with Albert Marko, Sam Rines, and Tracy Shuchart. Before we get started, please, if you can like and subscribe to our YouTube channel, we would really appreciate it.
Also, before we get started, I want to talk a little bit about Complete Intelligence. Complete Intelligence, automates budgeting processes and improves forecasting results for companies globally. CI Futures is our market data and forecast platform. CI Futures forecasts approximately 900 assets across commodities, currencies and equity indices, and a couple of thousand economic variables for the top 50 economies. CI Futures tracks forecast error for accountable performance. Users can see exactly how CI Futures have performed historically with one and three month forward intervals. We’re now offering a special promotion of CI Futures for $50 a month. You can find out more at completeintel.com/promo.
Okay, this week we had a couple of key themes. The first is oil for rubles and somewhat cynically, the death of the dollar. Next is the rapidly depreciating Japanese yen, which is somewhat related to the first. But it’s a big, big story, at least in Asia. We also have the hawkish Fed and the soaring five-year bond. So let’s just jump right into it. Tracy, we’ve seen so much about oil for rubles and Bitcoin and other things over the past week. Can you walk us through it? And is this a fundamental shift in energy markets? Is it desperation on Russia’s behalf? Is the dollar dead? Can you just walk us through those?
TS: All right, so no, the dollar is not dead. First, what people have to realize is that there’s a difference. Oil is still priced in USD. It doesn’t matter the currency that you choose to trade in because you see, in markets, local markets trade gasoline in all currencies. Different partners have traded oil in different currencies. But what it comes down to is it doesn’t matter because oil is still priced in dollars. And even if you trade it in, say, the ruble or the yuan, those are all pegged to the dollar. Right. And so you have to take dollar pricing, transfer it to that currency. And so it really doesn’t matter.
And the currency is used to price oil needs three main factors, liquidity, relative stability, and global acceptability. And right now, USD is the only one that possesses all three characteristics.
TN: Okay, so two different questions here. One is on the acceptance of cryptocurrency. Okay. I think they specifically said Bitcoin. Is that real? Is that happening? And second, if that is happening and maybe, Albert, you can comment on this a little bit, too. Is that simply a way to get the PLA in China to spend their cryptocurrency to fuel their army for cheap? Is that possibly what’s happening there?
TS: It could be. Russia came out and said, we’ll accept Bitcoin from friendly countries. Mostly, they were referring to Hungary and to China. Right. And I don’t think that is a replacement for USD no matter what because not every country except for perhaps China really accepts or El Salvador really accepts Bitcoin or would actually trade in Bitcoin. Right.
TN: In Venezuela, by the way. I think. Right. So on a sovereign basis. Okay. So Sam and Albert, do you guys have anything on there in terms of Bitcoin traded for energy? Do you have any observations there?
AM: No, this is a little bit of… This is even a serious conversation they’re having? With El Salvador going to be like the global hub for Russian oil now because they can use Bitcoin?
TN: That would be really interesting.
AM: But this is just silly talk. Every time there’s some kind of problem geopolitically and they start talking about gold for oil or wine or whatever you want to throw out, they start talking about the US dollar dying and whatnot.
I mean, like Tracy, I don’t want to reiterate what Tracy said, but her three points were correct. On top of that, we’re the only global superpower.
TN: Okay.
AM: That’s it.
SR: Yeah. My two cent is whatever on Bitcoin for a while.
TN: Right.
SR: Cool.
TN: I think that all makes sense now since we’re here because we’re already here because we all hear about the death of the petrodollar and the rise of the petroyuan and all this stuff. So can we go there a little bit? Does this mean that the petrodollar is dead? I know that what you said earlier is all oil is priced in dollars. So that would seem to be at odds with the death of the petrodollar.
AM: Well, Tony, in my perspective, the petrodollar is a relic of the 1970s. Right. Okay. Today it’s the Euro dollar. It’s not the petrodollar that makes the American economy run like God on Earth at the moment. It’s the Euro dollar. Forget about Petro dollar. Right. Because it’s not simply just oil that’s priced in it in dollars. It’s every single piece of commodity globally that’s priced in dollars.
TN: And Albert, just for viewers who may not understand what a Euro dollar is, can you quickly help them understand what a Euro dollar is?
AM: They’re just dollars deposited in overseas banks outside the United States system. That’s all it is.
TN: Okay with that. Very good.
SR: And the global economy runs on them. Full stop.
AM: It’s the blood of the global economy.
TN: So the death of the petrodollar, rise of the petroyuan and all that stuff, we can kind of brush that aside. Is that fair?
TS: Yeah. I mean, even if you look at say, you know, China started their own Yuan contract rights, oil contract and Yuan futures contract. But that still pegged to the price of the Dubai contracts. Right. That are priced in dollars.
TN: Let’s be clear, the CNY and crude are both relative to dollars. Right?
TS: Right.
TN: You have two things that are relative to dollars trying to circumvent dollars to buy that thing. The whole thing is silly.
TS: Exactly.
AM: Yeah, of course. Because Tony, the thing is, if China decides to sell all their dollars and all their trade or whatever, everything they’ve got, they risk hyperinflation. What happens to the Renminbi and then what happens in the world? Contracts trying to get priced right.
TN: Exactly. It’s a good point. Okay. This is a great discussion.
Now, Albert, while we’re on currencies, The Japanese yuan fell pretty hard versus the dollar this week. Do you mind talking through that a little bit and helping us understand what’s going on there?
AM: Yeah, I got a real simple explanation. The Federal Reserve most likely green light in Japan To devalue their yen to be able to show up the manufacturing sector in case China decides to get into a bigger global geopolitical spat with the United States. Simple as that.
TN: Great. Okay. So that’s good. This is really good. And I want people to understand that currencies are very relevant to geopolitics or the other way around. Right. Whenever you see currency movements, there’s typically a geopolitical connection there.
AM: Of course. And on top of that, if it was any other time and they started to devalue the currency like this, the Federal Reserve where the President would start calling the currency manipulators. And there’d be page headlines on the financial times.
TN: Right.
AM: And because that didn’t happen, It’s an automatic signal to me that this is what’s happening at the moment. Right.
What’s also interesting to me, Albert, is we’ve seen last week we saw Japan approach the Saudis and the Emiratis about oil contracts. We saw Japan call. There’s a meeting in Japan next week, I think, with China. So Japan is becoming this kind of foreign policy arm, whether we want to admit it or not, they’re kind of becoming foreign policy arm for the US. Because the US is not well respected right now. Is that fair to say?
AM: It’s more than fair to say, I believe Biden’s conference with South Asian leaders was just canceled on top of everything else.
TS: Sorry. And we saw this week Japan and India just signed, like, a $42 billion trade deal. So it kind of seems like they’re smoothing over the rough edges because the United States kind of came after India a little bit earlier about two weeks ago.
TN: Yeah, that’s a good call, Tracy. I think Japan and India have had a long, positive relationship. It’s especially intensified over the past, say, seven or eight years as China has tried to invest in India and the Japanese have kind of countered them and giving the Indians very favorable terms for investment and for loans. And so this is kind of a second part of that investment that was, I think, announced in, say, 2014 or 2015, something like that. And again, as we talked about it’s, Japan intervening to help the US out and obviously help Japan out at the same time. Thanks for that.
Now, Sam. We saw bonds spike pretty hard this week, especially the five year. I’ve got a Trading View source up there on the five year up on the screen right now. So can you walk us through what’s happening with US bonds right now, especially the five year?
SR: Sure. I mean, it’s pretty straightforward. The Fed is getting very hawkish and the market is adopting it rather quickly. And I don’t know how forcefully to say this. The current assumption coming from city is four straight 50 basis point hikes and then ending the year with just a couple of 25. That is a pretty incredibly fast off zero move time, some quantitative tightening, and you’re somewhere around three and a half percent to 4% worth of tightening in a year. That’s a pretty fast move.
So the two year to five years reflecting that the Fed is moving very quickly, you’re likely having the long end of the curve is lagging a little bit. You saw flattening, not steepening this week. The long end of the curve is telling you that the terminal rate may, in fact, actually be at least somewhat sticky around two and a half and might actually be moving a little bit higher. And that terminal rate is really important because that is how high the Fed can go and then stay there. It is also how fast the Fed can get there and how much above it the Fed is willing to go. So I think there’s a lot of things that happened on the curve this week.
TN: Okay. Albert, what’s in on those? Yes, go ahead, Albert.
AM: Oh, I’ve heard whispers that the long bond is going to 2.8% and maybe even 3%. That’s what the whispers have been telling me about that, which is going to absolutely devastate housing.
TN: But that was my actual idea.
SR: Oh, yeah. Housing is done. I mean, you saw pending home sales were supposed to be up a point and down 4%. That’s the first signal. The next signal will be when lumber goes back to $300.
TN: Okay. It seems to me you’re saying by say Q3 of this year we’re going to see real downside in the housing market. Is that fair to say?
SR: Oh, in Q2, you’re going to see real downside in the housing market. Yeah.
TN: Wow.
SR: Pending sales are, I think, one of the most important indicators of how the housing market is going. Right. It’s a semi forward looking indicator. If you begin to see a whole bunch of these homes in the ground stay as homes that are not being built. Right. So if you begin to see just a bunch of pads out there, it’s going to become a significant problem considering a lot of people have already bought the materials to build it off. And you’re going to begin to have some really interesting spirals that go back into some of the commodity markets that have been on fire on the housing front.
TN: Wow. Okay. That’s a big call. I love this discussion. Okay, good. Okay. So let’s move on to the week ahead. Tracy, we’ve had some stimulus announced to help pay for energy. Can you help us understand? Do you expect we’ve seen California and some other things come out? Are more States going to do this or more countries going to do this, and what does that do to the inflation picture?
TS: Well, absolutely. We saw California, Delaware, Germany, Italy talking about it. Japan already. They’re coming out of the woodwork right now. There’s actually too many to list. It’s just that we’re just now this week just starting to see the US kind of joining this on a state to state basis. The problem is that this is not going to help inflation whatsoever. You’re literally creating more demand and we still do not have the supply online. So all of these policies are going to have the opposite of the intended effect that they are doing. Right. It’s just more stimulus in the market.
TN: Do we think there’s going to be some federal energy stimulus coming?
TS: They’ve talked about different options. I mean, really, the only thing that they could do right now is get rid of the federal excise tax, but that’s only really a few cents. And they kind of don’t want to do that because that goes towards repairing roads, et cetera. That doesn’t fit into their plan that they just passed back in the fall. Right. We had infrastructure plan, so they need to pay for that. That’s already passed. So they probably won’t do that.
The other options that they have that they’re weighing are more SPR release, which is ridiculous at this point because they could release it all and it would still not have a long lasting effect on the market. And that’s our national security. It’s a national security issue. And we’re experiencing all these geopolitical events right now. We have bombs in Saudi Arabia. We’ve got Russia, Ukraine. So I think that’s like a poor move altogether.
TN: So if more States are going to come in, is it suspects like Massachusetts, New York, Illinois, those types of places?
TS: Yes.
TN: Okay. So all inflationary, it’s going in the wrong direction.
TS: It’s going to create demand, which is going to drive oil prices higher because we still don’t have the supply on the market.
TN: Okay. Wow. Thanks for that. Sam. As we look forward, you mentioned a little bit about how hawkish the Fed would be. But what are you looking at say in the bond market for the next week or so? Do we expect more activity there, or do you think we’re kind of stabilizing for now?
SR: We’re going into month end. So I would doubt that we’re going to stabilize in any meaningful way as portfolios either head towards rebalancing or begin to rebalance into quarter end. So I don’t think you’re going to see stabilization. And I think some of the signals might be a little suspect. But I do think back to the housing front. I’m going to be watching how housing stocks react, how the dialogue there really reacts, probably watching lumber very closely, a fairly good indicator of how tight things are or aren’t on the housing front.
And then paying a little bit of attention to what the market is telling us about that terminal rate. If the terminal rate keeps moving higher, to Albert’s point, that’s going to be a big problem for housing, but it’s going to be a big problem for a number of things as we begin to kind of spiral through, what the consequences of that are. It will be for the first time in a very long time.
TN: Okay. So it’s interesting. We have, say, energy commodities rising. We have, say, housing related commodities potentially falling, and we have food commodities rising. Right. It seems like something’s off. Some of it’s shortages based, and some of it is really demand push based. So energy stuff seems to be stimulus based or potentially so some interesting divergence in some of those sectors.
Okay. And then, Albert, what’s ahead for equity markets? We’ve seen equity markets continue to push higher. How much further can they go?
AM: Last week they eliminated, I think, up to about $9 trillion inputs, short squeeze, VIX crush. I mean, they went all out these last two weeks. It’s absolutely stunning. From my calculations, I think they expanded the balance sheet another $150 billion. Forget about this tapering talk. There’s no tapering. They just keep on going. How high can they go? That’s anybody’s guess right now. I think we’re like 6% off all time highs. On no news.
TN: So potentially another 6% higher?
AM: Honestly, I know that there’s hedge funds waiting, salivating at 4650. Just salivating to short it there. So I don’t think they can even get close to that, to be honest with you. So I don’t know, maybe 4590 early in the week before they start coming down.
TN: Okay. Interesting. So you think early next week we’ll see a change in direction?
AM: Yeah, we’re going to have to this has been an epic run, like I said, 90% short squeeze, 10% fixed crush. You don’t see this very often. Okay, Sam, what do you think, Sam? Similar?
SR: On equities, I like going into the rip higher. I’m kind of with Albert, but a little less bearish. I think you chop sideways from here looking for a catalyst in either direction. Bonds ripping higher today, yields ripping higher today. Bond prices plummeting. That I thought was going to be a catalyst for equities to move lower. It wasn’t. That kind of gives me a little bit of pause on being too bearish here, but it’s hard for me to get bullish.
TN: Okay.
TS: What’s interesting? I’ll just throw in like, Bama, weekly flows. We actually saw an outflow from equities for the first time in weeks. It wasn’t a lot 1.9 billion. But that says to me people are getting a little nervous up here. Profit taking, as they say on CNBC.
TN: All right, guys. Hey, thank you very much. Really appreciate the insight. Have a great week ahead.
AM, TS: Thanks.
SR: You too, Tony.
TN: Fabulous. Look. I’m married. I’m a man. I don’t notice anything. I noticed the other guys laughed at that. Uncomfortably. That’s great. Okay. I’m just going to start that over, guys. And we’re going to end it.
This week, we saw a Fed rate rise, crude came back from the stratosphere, and Chinese equities came to life.
As we said last week:
– Sam said “watch the 5 and 7 year” bonds, where we saw serious action.
– Sam also said “grip it and rip it” with equity markets.
– Tracy said that dramatic spikes in crude markets were priced out of the market for now
– Albert called for a volatile week thru the Fed meeting, although we didn’t see the lows he’d expected.
Sam walked us through the Fed decision and what’s happening in the bond markets. He also explained a bit more about his “grip it and rip it” comment and where the leaves us.
LME is talking about banning Russian copper on the exchange. What does that mean for global copper markets, as explained by Tracy? We’re also coming off the nickel scandal at the LME. Are there bigger problems with at the LME – mixing politics with markets?
We saw China equity markets perk up this week. KWEB, the China tech ETF, is up over 40% since Monday. What happened, what is Albert watching and what’s coming for Chinese equity markets?
This is the 11th episode of The Week Ahead in collaboration of Complete Intelligence with Intelligence Quarterly, where experts talk about the week that just happened and what will most likely happen in the coming week.
TN: Hi, and welcome to The Week Ahead. I’m Tony Nash. And I’m joined by Albert Marko, Sam Rines, and Tracy Shuchart. Before we get started, I’d like to ask you to like and subscribe to our YouTube channel.
So this week it’s been a really interesting week. We saw Fed rate rise. We saw commodities, especially crude, come back from the stratosphere and we saw Chinese equities come back to life. So it’s been kind of a really weird week.
Last Friday, Sam said to watch the five- and seven-year bonds where we saw some serious action. He also said rip it and grip it with reference to equity markets. So let’s dig into that a little bit today.
Tracy said the dramatic spikes in crude markets were probably priced out in the week before, which we saw bear out this week. And Albert called for an active week before the Fed. We didn’t see the low he expected, but I think very much in line with the volatility he expected this week.
So, Sam, to get started, can you walk us through the Fed’s decision and what’s happening in bond markets?
SR: Yeah. So I think the Fed’s decision is pretty simple to understand on a number of levels. It’s inflation, inflation, inflation and everything else is secondary. When asked multiple times what would knock them off of the call it the inflation war, they made it very clear there was very little that would knock them off that path. So you had a lot of action on seven-year, five-year and a little bit on 10? Not as much as I would have expected, really. But the basic reaction was the Feds going the Fed’s going very hard, very fast, probably would have done 50 if it weren’t for Ukraine and may do 50 at a coming meeting or two if the war in Ukraine doesn’t begin to really spiral into an employment issue in the US. It does not matter about a growth issue, matters about employment issue. So I think that’s really critical.
The two-year looks really well priced to me in light of that situation, quantitative tightening, whatever. That will happen in May. We know that.
TN: We’re convinced it’s happening in May.
SR: We’re convinced it’s happening in May. Yeah. The rhetoric from the Fed is pretty clear that they’re going to go early and they’re going to go fast on quantitative tightening. None of that is great for the longer end of the curve, starting at five s and ending at 30s.
If you want to kind of think about it in terms of ideal perspective, in terms of pricing, it’s probably pretty good. 5s, 7s, 10s, 30s have all priced a pretty interesting growth to inflation narrative that if you begin to have the growth narrative breakdown, if you begin to have the long term inflation embedded narrative breakdown, because the very fast, very good Fed, that’s going to change, and that’s going to push those yields down, prices up pretty dramatically, pretty quickly.
TN: Fantastic. So when you talk about QT in May, I think I bounced back and forth over the past, say month or two months where people are talking about QT, then they’re talking about the possibility of QE, then we’re talking about QT.
So the QT aspect of it, if that happens, which when you say I fully expect it to happen, the main point there is to take money out of circulation, is that right? What is the main point of QT?
SR: What is the main point of QT? Main point of QT is signaling.
TN: Okay.
SR: In my opinion. QE is a pretty big signal to go ahead and buy everything. QT is a pretty good signal that the Fed is serious, right. It’s a seriousness issue. It’s not as dramatic, I think, as it might be interpreted by the financial media in terms of an actual translation to financial conditions or to equity markets, et cetera.
It does tend to knock down multiples, and it probably adds another 25 to 50 basis points worth of tightening this year. But I wouldn’t say it’s a shredding of cash. It’s a shredding of reserves. So reserves never made it in to the market in terms of real usable high power cash. That’s a big difference.
TN: Okay. So when we look at the environment right now versus what you’re expecting for QT in May, are we in kind of an interim opportunistic equity market right now? Are people just kind of trading until the inevitable comes? What’s happening, especially in US equity markets?
SR: What’s happening in US equity markets? That’s a tougher question to answer than you might think. A lot of short covering. That’s the first thing. Second thing is most of the risk seem to be priced as we exited last week. Right.
If you’re going to price the world for World War Three or some sort of big tail risk, that was the time to do it. And you simply didn’t have any of that come to fruition. You had a hawkish Fed, but you didn’t have a Fed that seemed to want to break something really quickly. And it’s pretty obvious that they’re willing to break something at this point, but they didn’t want to break it with a 50 basis point hike or call it three or 3 or 50 basis point hikes. That is one of the reasons why equity markets get a little bit of relief here.
The other side is that the ten year yield dropped. The ten-year yield dropping took some pressure off the Nasdaq for rate increases or interest rate increases that side of things. So Nasdaq outperformed S&P, that’s a pretty important signal. There was some risk on this week.
TN: Great. Okay, Albert, what’s your rate on US equity markets in light of what Sam is talking about with Fed action?
AM: Sam’s right. They want to break something, but they don’t want to be seen as breaking something. I mean, I was dead wrong on the sub 4,000. I completely forgot that Opex was this week. They were not going to pay out $4 trillion and put up just the people. It was just that they probably spent 100 to 150 billion this week to pump this market up and keep it stable up in the stratosphere up here.
I guarantee they spent about at least $100 billion doing that this week. And they just annihilated people. They kept equities up. They are signaling that they’re going to hit inflation hard and fast, just like Sam said. They have to because things are just getting silly at this point.
TN: Okay. And Tracy, in light of what Sam is talking about with QT and more hikes later in the year, do you expect that to have a material impact on commodities over the short to medium term, or do you think they’re still on this strong trajectory that you’ve expected?
TS: Yeah. I think that unfortunately, the Fed cannot subside this with rate hikes because we have, again, real supply demand issues. And so I think the commodities markets, the trajectory is going to continue higher. It doesn’t matter, especially when we’re looking at now we have this Ukraine Russia war, and now we also have 50 million people locked down in China again. And they just closed one of their major ports and manufacturing hubs this week. So supply chains that were sort of beginning to mend, right, after 2020 just got thrown into an entire tail spin once again.
TN: I have a friend in the manufacturing sector who because of the Shenzhen Port close and city close, he got several force majeure letters this week. So that stuff is cascading through industry. We’re not necessarily seeing it in markets yet, but it’s really cascading through industry really quickly. And I think we’re going to start to see that appear in financial statements of companies in the coming months.
AM: That’s important, Tony, because my contention has always been that they’re allowing inflation to run wild because it reduces the amount of rate hikes they actually have to do come May, they might be done with their last rate hikes at that point and start QT just simply on the basis that the supply chains and the economy is struggling.
TN: Right. One thing I want to go back to, Tracy, when you say bullish market and this is my understanding of your statements, but you’re bullish on commodities, you’re not talking about crude going to $140 again next week. This is a medium term play. Is that fair to say?
TS: It’s a medium to longer term play, which I’ve kind of always stated, granted, we had the Russian Ukraine factor come in that push prices to 130 WTI, which was a lot faster than I anticipated. I really liked the fact that we pulled back from that, got some of that geopolitical risk air out of the market, but we’re still on the same trajectory of $150 a barrel over the course of the next year or two.
TN: Right. Okay. Now, while we’re on Russia Ukraine, the LME came out with some news about copper this week and we’re showing that on the screen right now talking about the LME potentially banning Russian copper on the exchange. Can you talk us through that? And what does that mean for global copper markets?
TS: All right, so this is, the LME Commission basically suggested that they ban Russian oil. This has to be presented to the internet. Copper. You said Russian oil.
TN: You meant copper, right?
TS: Copper, yes. Sorry. This has to be presented to the international community for this to actually go through. The problem here is Russia is the 7th largest producer of copper. They account for about 4% of global production. It’s a role on the LME exchange is more significant because they are the third largest exporter of refined copper metal and this is deliverable to the exchange. So this really would send LME markets into chaos. Literally.
TN: Okay, so let’s kind of somehow link that to the LME nickel issues that we saw last week. Okay? Could this, as an exchange, could actions like this impact the credibility of the LME or what does this mean kind of political actions and by “political actions”, I mean there was intervention on behalf of a Chinese entity for the nickel market last week.
There’s potential intervention as a result of geopolitical issues with Russia in the coming weeks. So will we see exchanges get more political and will that impact impact their credibility as an exchange?
TS: Well, that’s the problem, yes. And I do think that it will impact their credibility. The nickel market is essentially broken at the LME rights now, right. They reopened again on Tuesday. They set daily limits at 5%, limit down. They were limited down right away. They raised it to 8% on Thursday, limit down right away, 12% on Friday, limit down right away.
And basically, that’s not because of the fundamentals of the market. That’s because people are running for the hill. They just want out of that contract. Right. And so that is definitely going to be a problem for the LME market going forward.
TN: Are there dangers and we don’t necessarily need to name other markets, but are there dangers of other we’ll say developed market exchanges to kind of make these types? Could we see CBOT or CME or some of these guys start to play these games, too?
TS: I think that’s a difficult question to answer. I do not think that you will see CME do that unless you have some other foreign markets do that first.
TN: Unless a big Chinese state owned entity lose a lot of money.
TS: If we see SHFE do something like that, then I think the United States will. But I do not think you’ll see the CME market actually.
TN: Okay. Yeah. I mean, I’m not sure that some people understand that these exchanges are actually businesses and they have to make business decisions. Right. And some of these business decisions, they’re not completely neutral market participants. Right. In some cases, they get involved in these trades.
TS: They’re there to make money. Right.
TN: They are there to make money. But when politics inserts itself into markets, these exchanges that people think are kind of arms length to the trades, it starts some people wondering about the price. Are they actually getting the right price? Is there really a true market there?
TS: Well, exactly. And that’s exactly what we’re seeing at the LME right now. At the command, so far, we have not seen that at CME yet. But that is to be determined.
TN: Right. Albert, Sam, what do you guys have to say on this?
AM: From my perspective, I can’t really add much to what Tracy said. She’s right on the ball. When it comes to systemic issues, politics gets in the way and protects it. That’s just the way it works. And unfortunately, just seeing what you’re seeing today, which is undermining, it undermines the trust in the entire market overall.
TN: Yeah. It just seems like a problem that’s really hard to get over. Right. Like how long will it be broken and when it’s back, will it snap back? I just don’t know. Sam, do you have any thoughts on this?
SR: My only thought is very similar to Albert’s, in terms of I don’t think anybody’s going to actually trust the LME anytime soon. If you’re going to make a significant trade in a metal, I highly doubt you’re going to want to do it through the LME without having some sort of backup to that position.
TN: Okay, great. Let’s move on to Chinese equities. Albert, we saw China equity markets forgot this week, KWEB, for example, which is a China tech ETF, is up over 40% since Monday. So what happened and what are you watching?
AM: Again, the systemic issues that China is facing in the market, I mean, Hong Kong was about 5% away from just absolutely imploding. They had a new problem where it wasn’t just the foreign money that was leaving the system, but actually the mainland mainland Chinese investors were taking money out, which was something new. And it was to the point where the peg might have even broken. So they had to shore it up by liquidity injections. And the Xi had come out and made those comments citing Hong Kong twice. But I was on Twitter and I was saying, this just can’t happen.
China is completely about to fail market wise. So let’s start picking things, pick the best ETF, pick the best companies out of China. And I mentioned KWEB with you guys, GDS, Chindata, you can throw a dart and pick your Chinese name last week and it went up 40% to 80% at some point.
Same thing. Now I’m kind of trimming my position back, but Chinese housing is at that point right now, where the housing sector accounts for 75% of China’s wealth. They can’t just simply let it deteriorate into nothing where the banks are taking it over. That can’t happen. I mean, Xi would be out in his ass. Sorry about the commentary, but Xi would be out within months if that happens. So I’m going to pick top three Chinese housing names and go for it.
TN: It’s a brave call. It’s a really brave call.
AM: All right.
TN: Do you think there’s room to run with some of these Chinese tech companies or even the broader China market, or do you think the opportunity is really limited to real estate?
AM: Well, no, they can run. The problem that we have now is the Biden administration is starting to target China, assisting Russia and whatnot. So then now you have the geopolitical risks come into the equation and you see these things surge 40% one day, you can easily see a 20% retracement the next day or even more. So that’s why I’m just trimming you take your 60% and be happy with it.
TN: Right. So we talked about Chinese fiscal stimulus, Chinese monetary stimulus. We talked about devaluation. Do the events of the last week move up the time clock for the economic planners in China to get this stuff out the door?
AM: Absolutely. I think they have to even in conjunction with the US, because the US has no fiscal coming so the Chinese have to step up to simulate the economy. Otherwise the entire globe is going into a depression. It’s as simple as that.
TN: Yeah. It’s really. I remember over the past ten years, all the talk about coordinated economic stimulus and all this other stuff since 2008, 2009. And right now we’ve got the Fed pulling back and we’ve got China aggressively moving forward. It’s just a little bit strange. Sam, I guess from a macro perspective, can that work?
SR: It can work depending on how much stimulus is actually put into the system and how it is put into the system. The how is very important in terms of how impactful it will be. Not just domestically for China. But also how impactful it will be beyond their borders.
And what you’d be really concerned about from a macro perspective is how far beyond the borders does that stimulus actually get? That’s where I get interested in it, because if it does begin to move beyond the borders, it’s very positive for Europe. That’s very positive for some US companies. But you have to have a stimulus that isn’t just a transfer to businesses.
You have to have it actually hit the Chinese consumer and hit the Chinese consumer quickly.
TN: Okay. So we’re not just talking about a couple of RRR cuts, which is what they do all the time. It’s kind of the go to. This is the reserve requirement, right?
SR: Yeah. I don’t care if they do RRR cut.
TN: I don’t think many people do, although I think they kind of have to phone that in to show that they’re doing something. I would think it’s more aggressive on the fiscal side, on the TSF, the total social finance side, where they just need to churn the cash out to SMEs, SOEs, big multinational companies, that sort of thing to almost get them to the point where they’re exporting deflation again, of manufactured goods. Does that make sense as an approach, Sam?
SR: I mean, it makes a lot of sense as an approach, but at the same time, you’re locking down due to your COVID zero process or policy. So that process would be really interesting and intriguing. But it’s a question of whether or not it would be effective given the health policy on the other side. So, yes, it would be great, but it would be probably great in three to six months.
TN: Okay, so guys, this is a great point. The COVID zero policy, it feels like much of the rest of the world has come out of this. Right. And China has gone back into lockdowns. Do you think there’s a point at which other markets have an uncomfortable call with China and go, guys, you got to open up because you’re killing the rest of us.
SR: I think they had it. I think they had it. If you look at the way they’re handling the current lockdown, they’re busting people to factories.
There’s a closed loop factory policy. While you have a COVID zero policy and “these places are locked down,” they are busing people to the factories. So I think there’s been a little bit of a let’s move on here.
TN: Okay.
AM: And also want to point out is these lockdowns came suspiciously close to the talks with the US, both with Biden and our glorious blink or Sullivan, the genius Sullivan that we have. But I think it might have been a little bit of a negotiation tactics like if you decide to play hardball with us over Russia, we can just shut down and ding our economy. So I think there was a little bit of that also sprinkle in there, right. A little bit of real politics.
TN: Yeah. Okay, guys. So as we come out of this weird week, what do you expect for the week ahead? Tracy, what are you looking at for the week ahead?
TS: So I think in the commodity markets, we’re still at that point where we’re kind of coming down after that initial knee jerk reaction to Russia, Ukraine. So I expect a little bit of consolidation across markets. Depending. It’s kind of what we’re seeing. So I think the market still be volatile, but like less volatile. I think we’re kind of like at that ripple point where the ripples really big and then we kind of get smaller and smaller.
TN: I think you’re Right. I think the consolidation makes sense. Albert, what are you looking For? It seems to me on the geopolitical side, we’re almost going through almost a geopolitical consolidation a little bit. We’ve had so much drama over the past few weeks, but I almost feel like it’s coming down a bit.
AM: It has been coming down and that’s one of the reasons they’re able to sit there and pump the market so high. I think it was overbought, to be honest with you. I think this market even considering going back to 4500, you’re just going to have every fund out there shorting the heck out of it. So I would see them try to test 4470, 4480, 4490, maybe 4500, but after that, it’s probably downside from there.
TN: Okay. Great. Sam, what are you looking at?
SR: I’m looking at the five-year I think it’s a pretty interesting place to be and I think it’s going to be highly volatile. But that’s the one to watch with inflation and growth expectations beginning to be a little wobbly.
TN: Great. Guys, thanks so much. I really appreciate it. Have a great week ahead.
