Santa Fe railway: the new Coke?

After two-and-a-half years, Warren Buffet has bought the rest of his railroad. Reasons?

Michael Panzner interview

Some salient points in Michael's answers:

• The crisis could continue for another decade;
• investors will have to tread carefully and consider the risk of dealing with others;
• dividend yields could increase 2 - 4 times (suggesting that current stock prices could halve or quarter);
• after some more deleveraging during this year, it may be useful to accumulate precious metals

Read it all here; htp: Abnormal Returns

Also linked on AN is a story about Warren Buffett's firm insuring third parties against a long-term market drop. Berkshire Hathaway has taken $4 billion in bets; are they right? Or are they right only in the sense that nominal prices will hold, while inflation will mask the real reduction in value?

Rally? The smart money's been moving out for a long time

Read Michael Panzner here. Reminds me of when Jimmy Goldsmith sold all his holdings on the Paris Bourse in the Summer of 1987, and recently how Warren Buffett was reported to be holding massive amounts of cash.

Now Buffett has bought $5 billion of Goldman - but as preferred stock with a 10% dividend (and with warrants representing an instant capital gain from day one); and Philip Green is buying £2 billion of Baugur's debt. Note that these wise men are NOT buying stock market ordinary shares: they are betting on a sure thing, pretty much.

I think bear market rallies are when the pros sell to the amateurs. When the amateurs realise the pros have gone, and there are no more bigger fools, the panic proper starts. And then the pros are there, waiting for the bottom prices. I think this is what is behind legs 4 and 5 of the Elliott Wave.

Bill Gates: charity begins at home

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is set up to give away $38 billion (plus another $30 billion pledged by Warren Buffett).

While I'm in the mood for mad ideas, how about sparing some fraction of that (oh, a billion?) to go back to Bill's crazy source code and finally straighten out all the problems with Microsoft's core products, then send out a one-use-only disk to all previous purchasers, to reload everybody's programs with reliable updated versions?

Or should I stick with dreaming up more realistic schemes, like the deposit-free banking idea?

Buffett eyes Europe

A most interesting article by Matthew Lynn in this week's Spectator. It's certainly worth reading in full, but here's a few points and questions arising:

• Buffett's got $35 billion in cash to go a-shopping, and thinks Europe is more promising than the emerging markets - partly because Europe is already in recession.
• Have European companies endured because many have remained family-owned? Is the Anglo-Saxon model of capitalism too erratic and destructive?
• How important are hunches in investing? Lynn says, "Buffett doesn’t believe in extended due diligence or complex financial models. He chooses his investments based on what he feels about the people in charge, and whether he likes their products." And recently, George Soros said that for all his research, he pays attention to his own psychosomatic backaches.
• How much vital business information is conveyed - or betrayed - by tone of voice and body language? Mark McCormack said that he liked to go to meetings on his own, so that he wouldn't have to worry about unconscious non-verbal signals given away by an underling's reactions. For the same reason, he loved the opposition to come with company. Is the most important bit of investment reserach the site visit?

Quote of the day

This global credit bust is going to astound practically everyone, including the bears.

says Mish, daringly criticising Warren Buffett, who has declared a $billion-plus loss on short bets in the market.

Warren Buffett's misleading optimism

Jonathan Chevreau reports Warren Buffett's bullishness on the US economy, long-term; but the real gem in this piece is the extensive, but cogent and crunchy comment by Andrew Teasdale of The TAMRIS Consultancy, who analyses Buffett's real approach to equity valuations.

Teasdale points out that although interest rates hit 21% in 1982, there was less debt, higher disposable income and lower valuations: relative to disposable income, debt is a bigger burden today than it was 25 years ago. He summarises his position pithily:

It is also worthwhile remembering that not everyone holds a Buffet portfolio and not everyone has the luxury of a 220 year investment horizon. If I was a long term investor with no financial liabilities arising over the next 15 years equities would be my preferred asset class relative to cash and bonds, but I would be mindful of valuations in determining where I put my money.

Not all the bad debt has yet surfaced, and as Karl Denninger comments, even at this stage Citibank has recently been forced to borrow foreign money at 14%, and other banks at over 7%, in preference to the 3% Federal Funds rate, presumably to keep the scale of their insolvency in the dark.

Inflation is increasing, therefore money-lenders are going to want more income to compensate for risk and the erosion of the real value of their capital. For the yield to rise, the capital value of bonds has to fall.

So I read Teasdale's summary as implying that for now, it's cash rather than either bonds or equities.

Start like Buffett to end up like Buffett

Great article in The Motley Fool about how Warren Buffett founded and developed his fortune, and some of us could do the same.

Warren Buffett and derivatives

John Carney, in DealBreaker.com today, discusses Warren Buffett's recent involvement in derivatives, notwithstanding his previous publicly-announced disenchantment with the product. Does he understand the risks better this time around, or has he simply worded the contracts more carefully?

There's never just one cockroach in the kitchen

... says Warren Buffett, at the trial of a former Freddie Mac chief executive.

More surprises from Warren Buffett

Warren Buffett wants to pay more tax, according to NBC today.

And he doesn't have an accountant! (How many enemies can you make in one day?)

Buffett goes South and East

MoneyNews.com (Friday) reports on Warren Buffett's investments in Brazil and South Korea. Apparently the great man has made a pile in Brazilian currency but is now looking to switch to their bonds.

Abroad elsewhere, he's looking for high-dividend companies - a combination of the standard value investing formula and hedging against the dollar.

Weathering the storm

The bankers have shown their hand - they fear deflation more than inflation. Pumping-in cash and cutting rates will keep us going through the economic squalls that they created by the same lax monetary policy. If you believe the monetarists, there will be a price to pay, but as long as this crisis management succeeds, the damage will be insidious rather than cataclysmic: money will slowly rot.

Now that we know the opposition's strategy, what do we do? My guess is, hold cash, wait for further crises of confidence, and buy tangible assets, or assets backed by tangibles, at bargain prices.

That's why I think Buffett and Soros have been so clever in acquiring more rail stock in recent months. Railways are a natural Benjamin Graham choice: mature, income-producing investments. There are big barriers to entry - think of nineteenth-century land speculation and skulduggery, and add-in eco protests, modern politics and the unavailability of coolie labour. Rail has advantages over road, especially as so much freight now is containerised and port-to-city; but from an investor's perspective it is also solidly thing-based.

Other experts are into tangibles also. For example, Marc Faber likes real estate in emerging economies - and possibly in depressed areas of developed countries, and Bill Bonner has farmland in Argentina (the Chinese love beef). And then there's various types of commodity.

I think we'll be back to putting money into things we can understand.

Living off our inheritance: global wealth distribution, GDP and debt

The World Institute for Development Economics Research of the United Nations University (UNU-WIDER) launched a report last December, about household net worth around the world. Here's a nugget or two from their press release:

“The study finds wealth to be more unequally distributed than income across countries. High income countries tend to have a bigger share of world wealth than of world GDP.” (p. 3)

This suggests to me that the wealthy countries are to some extent living on their capital.

‘China … fails to feature strongly among the super-rich because average wealth is modest and wealth is evenly spread by international standards. However, China is already likely to have more wealthy residents than our data reveal for the year 2000, and membership of the super-rich seems set to rise fast in the next decade.’ (p.4)

Surprisingly, household debt is relatively unimportant in poor countries. As the authors of the study point out: ‘While many poor people in poor countries are in debt, their debts are relatively small in total. This is mainly due to the absence of financial institutions that allow households to incur large mortgage and consumer debts, as is increasingly the situation in rich countries….many people in high-income countries have negative net worth and—somewhat paradoxically—are among the poorest people in the world in terms of household wealth.’ (p. 5 - italics are mine.)

Figure 7, “Asset Composition in Selected Countries”, shows the proportion of real property, financial assets and debt in 7 countries, including the US, Canada and Japan. Looking at the ratio of debt to financial assets, China is clearly the least debt-burdened.

When a spendthrift heir meets a poor but hard-working and hard-saving entrepreneur, the result seems predictable. Look at page 16 of Warren Buffett's 28 Feb 2007 letter to shareholders, which I quoted at greater length on July 5:

"The world is ... willing to accept our bonds, real estate, stocks and businesses. And we have a vast store of these to hand over.... [but] foreigners now earn more on their U.S. investments than we do on our investments abroad. In effect, we’ve used up our bank account and turned to our credit card."

Buffett on trade imbalances

Warren Buffett's 28 February 2007 letter to shareholders is available online, and makes educational and entertaining reading. Here's a pithy extract:

As our U.S. trade problems worsen, the probability that the dollar will weaken over time continues to be high. I fervently believe in real trade – the more the better for both us and the world. We had about $1.44 trillion of this honest-to-God trade in 2006. But the U.S. also had $.76 trillion of pseudo-trade last year – imports for which we exchanged no goods or services. (Ponder, for a moment, how commentators would describe the situation if our imports were $.76 trillion – a full 6% of GDP – and we had no exports.) Making these purchases that weren’t reciprocated by sales, the U.S. necessarily transferred ownership of its assets or IOUs to the rest of the world. Like a very wealthy but self-indulgent family, we peeled off a bit of what we owned in order to consume more than we produced.

The U.S. can do a lot of this because we are an extraordinarily rich country that has behaved responsibly in the past. The world is therefore willing to accept our bonds, real estate, stocks and businesses. And we have a vast store of these to hand over.

These transfers will have consequences, however. Already the prediction I made last year about one fall-out from our spending binge has come true: The “investment income” account of our country – positive in every previous year since 1915 – turned negative in 2006. Foreigners now earn more on their U.S. investments than we do on our investments abroad. In effect, we’ve used up our bank account and turned to our credit card. And, like everyone who gets in hock, the U.S. will now experience “reverse compounding” as we pay ever-increasing amounts of interest on interest.

I want to emphasize that even though our course is unwise, Americans will live better ten or twenty years from now than they do today. Per-capita wealth will increase. But our citizens will also be forced every year to ship a significant portion of their current production abroad merely to service the cost of our huge debtor position. It won’t be pleasant to work part of each day to pay for the over-consumption of your ancestors. I believe that at some point in the future U.S. workers and voters will find this annual “tribute” so onerous that there will be a severe political backlash. How that will play out in markets is impossible to predict – but to expect a “soft landing” seems like wishful thinking.

It's reassuring that Buffett thinks per-capita wealth will increase; this is an antidote to the most extreme doomsters. But it begs the question of how equitably that wealth will be distributed. The transfer abroad of industrial jobs leaves most of their former holders in less well-paid employment, while boosting the profits of large multinational companies (such as Wal-Mart, in which Berkshire Hathaway has close to a billion-dollar stake). From James Kynge's China book, it seems that the gap between America's rich and poor is widening, and the middle class is shrinking. Save and invest while you can.

Buffett is also enlightening on the future of newspapers in the electronic age, and the occasional bargains to be had in insurance. His firm has made money out of carefully-considered reinsurance (including for Lloyds of London) and derivatives. Berkshire Hathaway has gradually moved from being a "growth" to a "value" business, delivering returns increasingly from income earned, and insurance business helps. BH has made a profit from "super-cat" insurance in the past year, but Buffett warns that Hurricane Katrina wasn't the last nor the worst possible.

Note also the warning in the extract about the dollar. Recent falls aren't the end of the necessary decline - see to the Levy report referred to in my previous post.

Railroads: further details

Chris Mayer writes about railroads in today's Daily Reckoning Australia. After describing Chinese technical feats, he looks at factors that make railways more attractive in today's America:

- Container transportation is booming as America imports more of its non-perishable goods. But fuel costs are rising. The energy-efficiency of rail is an advantage over trucking.

- The US population continues to move to the cities, where land is at a premium. Rail is more space-efficient, and less polluting than cars or planes.

So Buffett is doing his customary thing, of backing dull, dependable, comprehensible business that's going with the flow.

Looking at wider issues, maybe a highly concentrated population implies not only highly-capitalised amenities, but centralised power. How will America change as urbanisation continues? Will the internalised society (life governed by shared expectations of decent behaviour, liberty, egalitariansm) become a society of rule imposed from outside and above?

As it happens, I am reading Bill Bryson's childhood memoir of Des Moines, Iowa and the Fifties ("The life and times of the Thunderbolt Kid"), and he remembers when America had millions of small, family-owned farms and the Midwest was dotted with thriving little towns. When the farm went, what went with it?

And coming back to the resource-efficiency/sustainability arguments, I have an idea that although cities seem to be more efficient (because people are closer to each other), they are highly entropic - it takes a lot of work to stop them falling apart in all sorts of ways. Maybe the more distant future is back out on the prairies, with a return to localised production and self-government.

More on railroads, Buffett, Soros

Further to the last post, the Santa Fe railway is now owned by Burlington Northern (BNI), in which Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway has recently increased its stake to over 10%; and this 2002 article in the Observer reveals that George Soros worked as a railway porter. I expect Soros has his hard-headed reasons for his own investment, but it's hard to rid yourself of the love of choo-choos.

Soros' views as summarised in the Observer article resonate today:

His basic arguments remain the same - that centralised institutions need strengthening as a political counterweight to economic globalisation; financial markets are inherently unstable; and there is an inbuilt inequity, or centre-periphery, problem.

...he is examining the minutiae of the workings of the World Trade Organisation, and statistics on capital flows to developing countries.

...there is no level playing field in the world economy. The rules of the game favour the rich, or 'centre', countries. 'Within the well-developed global markets, the centre has a considerable advantage over the periphery because the centre is in charge. And contrary to the false ideology of market fundamentalism, financial markets do not tend towards equilibrium, they need to be managed. So whoever is in charge has a distinct advantage,' he says.

He says conditions set by the IMF during financial crises tend to reinforce boom-and-bust cycles. 'They push countries into recessions by forcing them to raise interest rates and cut budgets - exactly the opposite of what the US is doing in similar circumstances,' he writes in the new book. [i.e. "On Globalization"]

He is also critical of the US obsession with 'moral hazard' - that intervening in financial crises rewards incompetent investors. Bailing-in private investors has replaced bailing-out crisis-ridden countries, he argues. Such policies are building a 'new Maginot line', fighting yesterday's war against credit crises rather than focusing on the real problem of the calamitous collapse in investment flows to developing countries.

Buffett, Soros, railways - a thought

Many years ago, I read a series of books by a financial expert calling himself "Adam Smith". In one, he spoke to an investment manager who had bought a holding in a railway, I think the Santa Fe, and asked him why so, since the company was somewhere around bankrupt. The manager replied that he was looking at the value of the tangible assets still owned by the company - land, rolling stock etc.

Railways tend to own a lot more land than the bit the rails run on. Is this a reason for Buffett and Soros to have gotten into that kind of business?

Planning for the crash

The Contrarian Investor's Journal reveals Part 3 of its thoughts on the crash-to-come, and addresses the dilemma of whether we are to prepare for inflation, or deflation.

I think I agree with the writer's analysis that it may play out as follows:

1. The current inflation will continue until some big scare or crisis starts the run
2. Then there will be deflation, but governments will try to get out of it by printing even more money
3. Printing more money won't work, because people will have lost faith in the currency, so (if you follow the link provided by the writer) we will eventually get to a surge in the price of gold

But we don't know when stage 1 will end, and holding cash may reduce your wealth relative to other assets. So where do you invest?

Buying gold now may mean a long wait before the market comes round to your point of view (if it ever does) and as some (e.g. Peter Schiff) have pointed out, even if you're right, you may find the government forces you to give up your gold, as it did before.

Houses are overpriced, but rather than a general sell-off of real estate I could imagine a long period of house price stagnation, with people staying put if possible. You haven't lost money till you've sold, or the bank has forced you to sell. If you really have nerve, you might sell, live in a tent and buy a bargain when (if!) the housing market tanks - but would your partner agree? Christopher Fildes was suggesting (in the Spectator magazine) moving into a hotel, some years ago - but look at what's happened to London house prices since then.

Some businesses continue even during a depression, if they provide essential services. It's interesting that Warren Buffett and George Soros have both bought into railways recently.

I can't call the play - personally, I am looking to reduce debt and trim personal expenditure, increase cash savings, and otherwise invest with a weather eye on the macroeconomic situation.

Mr Buffett takes a train

Seeking Alpha reports today that Warren Buffett now shares George Soros' recently-discovered liking for railways - perhaps this illustrates a transport energy-efficiency theme.