2007 = 1987?

Greg Silberman in Safe Haven yesterday uses the chartist approach to suggest an analogy with the lead-up to the 1987 crash.

I don't know. Over the late '86/early '87 period I watched my little investment soar and began to wonder how everybody could get rich at the same time. I heard reports that people were borrowing against their houses to trade, and schoolboys were making money on the market. I don't read quite that degree of crazy optimism and greed today.

Maybe the difference is reflected in the degree of monetary inflation. In the UK, the 3 years leading up to October 1987 showed an average annualized increase in M4 of 18.59%, compared with an average 12.07% annualized over the 12 quarters to March 2007. And over here at least, people are much more leery of investments and pensions than they were then.

But there's loads more debt now. It could be that a drop happens, not because of a change in investor confidence, but on account of running short of spending cash.

Place your bets

The Dow Jones Industrial Average closed yesterday at 13,785.07. Where will it go? Please see the survey on the right.

Here's an idea: the doomsters may be correct in their analysis, but wrong in their prognosis. If sovereign wealth funds continue to grow, we may see a new type of massive institutional investor, one that has no plans to retire or die. So ownership of American, British and other Western countries' businesses will shift to the East.

Initially, this will seem to make little difference, except that the markets may become better-supported against falls and may trend upwards, long-term (in currency terms; I'm not so sure about inflation-adjusted terms). But the dividends on foreign-owned shares will not accrue to the host countries, and so the US and UK will bleed from two wounds: trade deficits and accelerating loss of investment income.

If small businesses are eaten by big businesses, and big businesses have been taken over by sovereign wealth funds of other nations, the result for us may be not only economic impoverishment, but a form of slavery, since we will have lost control of our means of production. All we will have left is our labour, and in world terms, you and I are grossly overpaid. There is an developing Eastern middle class that can and will do everything better, faster, harder and cheaper than you. Many of them speak better English than the English.

Look at the businesses these sovereign wealth funds are going for. China: $3 bn for a 9.9% stake in giant US hedge fund Blackstone in May this year, and now (with Singapore) 10% of Barclays Bank (UK); Qatar: Sainsbury's (UK supermarket chain). These investments involve commercial property, finance and retail distribution. I've recently relayed James Kynge's statement that Chinese manufacturing only gets them 15% of the end price; now they're after the other 85%. I shouldn't be surprised if we start to see acquisitions in marketing and advertising firms, too.

What to do? I think:

• Work hard and earn as much as you can, while you can.
• Look after your health. Better not to get sick in the first place, than hope for "healthcare" to put Humpty Dumpty back together.
• Live simply and well within your means. Do you need a car? One that size?
• Pay off debts as fast as possible.
• Save and invest.

And if you have time and don't mind potential official surveillance and bullying, give your politicans earache about their incompetence, which is on a scale that to some might seem almost treacherous.

Plunge Protection Team trying to keep precious metals low

An extraordinary (to me) comment by Michael Misunas, responding to Michael Panzner's post in Seeking Alpha today - do read it. He says that the US Government's "Plunge Protection Team" has not only punted huge sums into derivatives to support the stockmarket each time it falls significantly, but has recently been rigging the market against gold and silver.

Assuming that you can't buck the market forever, it looks like an opportunity to buy precious metals.

Fragility of the stockmarket

Ben Steverman in Business Week (20 July) gives reasons to worry about the US stockmarket, one of them being the amount of borrowed money powering it, which is something Richard Daughty also comments on (see link in previous post). A credit contraction could trigger a collapse in stock prices.

My comment: this might sound like a reason to hold cash, but the hyper-inflation scenario espoused by some is predicated on what they expect will be the response of the government to the threat of a depression.

Housing corrections and stock corrections related

Tim Wood, in Financial Sense (13 July), tracks housing cycles and the Dow, and predicts a drop in the Dow sometime, to follow the drop that has already occurred in housing. He also sees a series of 4-year cycles; Contrary Investor connects the Dow and Presidential terms, in an article earlier this month.

Inflation, housing losses and a stockmarket bubble.

Richard Daughty aka The Mogambo Guru lays about him on 12 July. The housing bubble continues to deflate and inflation is up.

Apparently M3 (no longer reported as such by the Fed) has risen from 8% to 13.7% since figures ceased to be released officially. Looking across the water at the UK, our M4 (bank private lending) has averaged over 13.5% over the four quarters ending 31 March, so it seems we're in the same boat.

A disturbing element in Daughty's report is the notion (relayed from Gary Dorsch at Global Money Trends) that the strategy of US Treasury chief Henry Paulson is to engineer a stockmarket bubble to offset the losses in the housing market. This, as cinemagoers used to say in the days of continuous showing, is where we came in.

Richard Daughty becomes spotty

Another entertaining rant from Richard Daughty, aka The Mogambo Guru. He passes on to us a sighting of Hindenburg Omens (see Investopedia definition here), raves about credit creation, and finally breaks out in sunspots...

Apparently several different sunspot cycles can be correlated with variations in marine life productivity, and the biggest threat to the environment since 200 years ago is a predicted global cooling, starting in 2020. Read the Financial Post article here and Melanie Phillips' related eco-contrarian article here.

Marc Faber: bonds turning bearish, stocks to lose real value

Marc Faber and others give their investment views today on The Market Oracle. A quote from Faber:

We are now at the onset of a major bear market in bonds worldwide that should bring interest rates above the level in 1981 when US Treasuries were yielding over 15 per cent. But this process will take at least 10 years. In this environment stocks will not do well in real terms but will rise in nominal terms. How high will depend on (US Federal Reserve chairman Ben) Bernanke's money printing presses.

I think I have already suggested that, adjusted for inflation, stockmarkets have already fallen far below their 1999 positions, and this looks like confirmation that more of the same is expected.

How far could the Dow (and FTSE) fall?

Some (e.g. a commenter on one of my May 12 posts) think the Dow couldn't possibly fall 50%, but there is no objective support level for a falling market, it's just a balance between buyers and sellers.

The Wall Street Crash started dramatically, but took about 3 years to complete its decline. On September 3, 1929 the Dow reached a peak at 381.17; by July 8, 1932 it stood at 41.22.

Serious, experienced analysts like Michael Panzner and Peter Schiff tell us that in some respects, the systemic financial problems we now face are indeed comparable to those times. Our advantage is that we have that history to warn us.

UPDATE

More recently, the FTSE 100 reached a peak of 6,930 on December 31, 1999 and a low of 3,287 in March 2003, as shown here. That's a drop of over 52%.

At the time of writing (5:42 pm GMT) it stands at 6,649, but you have to see this in the context of massive monetary inflation; compared with the end of 1999 in real terms, it's lost a lot of ground already. That's why I've suggested that we may already be in a bear market that is disguised by inflation. As in Alice in Wonderland, it has to run quite hard just to stay in the same place.

Is the bear view becoming more generally accepted?

Friday's CNBC echoes familiar themes: Leburn of Weiss Capital Management tips high-dividend stocks in financially strong companies (as per Peter Schiff's book); David Tice favours cash (see Marc Faber recently), maybe with precious metals to protect against the dollar's decline; the stockmarket looks volatile (maybe kept up for a time by inflation).

China's stockmarket begins to cool

The Chinese market dropped 6.8% today; not much compared to its rise this year, but it's seen as the start of a necessary correction - Mark Mobius of Templeton regards a potential 30% loss as healthy! However, The Daily FX think it may also trigger a similar bearishness on the Dow, and if it does, this will impact on the carry trade. It has already caused a drop on gold futures today. Everyone seems a bit jumpy.

The plain truth about investment

Dan Denning in The Daily Reckoning Australia says today:

"Studies show being in the right asset class accounts for over 90% of your total return in any given investment.

--This happens to be why we are still bullish on Aussie resource stocks despite the China melt-up. Resource stocks are the right asset class to be in right now, and probably for the next 15 years. There will be dips and potholes. But if the asset class is right (and resource stocks made a 200-year low in 2000, so they are still very cheap in historic terms), then the investment maths is really simple."

That's it, unless you're a gunslinger investor and fancy your chances against people who stare at computer screens all day, all week. The world's governments can print all the money they like, but they can't print the resources that turn into things money buys. This is where most bears are bulls.

China's bubble - or long-term boom?

Bill Bonner's take on China's stake in US finance house Blackstone is bearish. He cites the OECD, saying low interest rates, thanks to China and Japan, have encouraged buy-outs like this.

Bonner has a jaundiced view of the fees and wheeler-dealing of market-makers, and believes that a flood of Chinese investors' money is raising share prices generally.

Today's Australasian Investment Review, quoted in ACN Newswire, dissents from the bubble view, giving these reasons:

• Firstly, much of the rebound in Chinese shares since 2005 reflects a recovery from a four-year bear market, during which individual Chinese investors lost confidence in shares and allocated most of their assets to bank deposits.

• Secondly, profit growth for listed Chinese companies over the last year has been a very strong 78%.

• Thirdly, while the price earnings ratio for Chinese A shares of around 40 times is high by our standards it is only just above its 10 year average of 36 times and is well below its previous high of 60 times.The PE on Chinese shares is also way below the peak levels reached during previous share market bubbles, eg, the Japanese Nikkei index peaked on a PE of 70 times in 1989 and the tech heavy Nasdaq reached a PE of 160 in 2000.

• Finally, Chinese investors still have a very low proportion of their financial wealth invested in shares, around 25% compared to over 50% in Australia and 40% in the rest of Asia. Bank deposits on 3% or so interest account for 65% of financial wealth.So the long term potential for a higher allocation to shares is high.

The author of this piece admits things need to cool down and the recent raising of interest rates should help. But, he says, China's financial and economic fundamentals are sound.

The arguments are cogent and reassure us about the longer term; but I imagine it's possible that if naive investors in China suffer a setback, they may over-react and become bearish for some time to come. If so, and bearing in mind Chinese light industry's vulnerability to exchange rates, a bold investor might buy medium/large-cap Chinese stocks. Not immediately, perhaps - I seem to recall that historically, a major stock slide takes around 30 months to hit bottom.

Richard Daughty worries about absence of increased debt!

The Mogambo Guru worried yesterday about a lack of increase in the money supply - maybe a first for him! But as he explains, in an inflation-sustained stockmarket it's a bit like a halt in the flow of blood round your system.

More bears - one British, one Chinese

Two more bears worry about the current state of the markets: a fund manager from Fidelity is concerned about easy credit terms and poor investment value; Asia's richest man is nervous about the Chinese stockmarket (up 85% so far this year).

What is Alan Greenspan doing?

Recently, ex-Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan has been sounding warnings about the US economy and is now aware that his back-seat driver comments may affect the market (see end of this article). It must be irritating for Ben Bernanke to deal with a boat-rocker whom some blame for creating the problems that Ben now faces.

And what is Mr Greenspan now doing? One of his new roles is as an adviser to investment managers PIMCO - see here for their latest US report. The style of the report is an uncomfortable combination of stuffy and jazzy, but the substance is interesting. Here's a few extracted phrases:

Currently there's a "virtuous circle favoring capital at the expense of labor", which only "a global financial bubble popping of sorts, an accelerated decline of U.S. housing in the short run, or a U.S.-led trade policy reversal that could precipitate counter-attacks from Asian exporters" could stop;

there are "inflationary pressures" in the US and an "asset bubble";
if a housing slump hits the American consumer economy, "anti-trade [i.e. protectionist] legislation may or may not become a reality";

"The emphasis on emerging market currencies rather obviously suggests relative weakness of the U.S. dollar. We continue to believe that U.S. growth will descend towards the lower quartile of countries within a broad global composite. Such U.S. growth, despite relatively favorable demographic labor force trends spiked by immigration, will suffer due to reduced U.S. consumption and the need for higher savings. Even in the face of resistance by Chinese authorities vis-à-vis the Yuan and the Japanese via artificially low interest rates, this lower growth speaks to a weaker dollar and lower relative asset price appreciation in comparison to the rest of the world. PIMCO portfolios will therefore likely feature increasing international diversification in foreign currency terms.";

PIMCO thinks that "sustainable global growth with perhaps an early cyclical slowdown appears to be the likeliest outcome. Those who “own” this growth as opposed to those who lend to it will benefit."

Not hard to boil this down. But potentially rewarding for an alert and adventurous investor. And Mr Greenspan the poacher will act as your gamekeeper, if you go with PIMCO.

China to watch US interest rate and exchange policies

... and from the other side, a thoughtful opinion by Zhang Ming in today's Chinese People's Daily online edition. It notes that changes in the US interest rate might have to be matched by China, but another option is for the US to devalue the dollar. Should the latter occur, it would affect flows of capital between the countries, but (in the writer's view) not so much the Chinese stockmarket, which is mainly powered by domestic investment.

Read this: Maggie Mahar at TPM Cafe

A good article by Maggie Mahar at cybersheet TPM Cafe - comments about Warren Buffett, David Tice, market bubbles and their aftermath.

The Kondratieff Cycle

Some investment analysts are "chartists" - they try to predict the future short-term movement of the markets, using patterns they think they've seen in the past. There are longer-term patterns too: we commonly talk of a "business cycle" of say 8 or 10 years.

Could there be really long cycles? Nicolai Kondratieff (or Kondratiev) (see Wikipedia article) thought so. His wave takes around 50 years and predicts decades of booms and depressions. His theory still excites professional investors today - see this article about Marc Faber, and Shane Oliver at AMP.

Of course, the question is how exactly to fit the pattern to our present situation. There is a nice graphic presentation here, showing past data and extrapolating to 2010. But look at other sites, too, like this one from 1998 - here the analysis suggests we have already hit the bottom.

Maybe the answer is that such patterns do exist, but the turning points are impossible to predict, so chartists stretch the waves. For example, you'll see in the second chart above (about technology, related to Kondratieff), that the first 3 cycles are set at 50 years, and the fourth at 40.

Sometimes an unexpected dramatic event starts the change, e.g the murder of Archduke Franz Ferdinand in 1914. And British history would have been very different if Guy Fawkes' 1605 plot to blow up King and Parliament hadn't been leaked. So you can't get the timing perfect.

But you can prepare. The two books recently reviewed on this blog explain why we should worry about the state of the US economy (and the UK has similar problems, maybe on a different scale). You don't need to know when the fire will start, as long as you've planned how to leave the building in an emergency.

Renminbi (Chinese Yuan) to rise soon?

A Chinese news report here details the current Chinese investment frenzy. The market doubled last year and has grown 50% so far this year. The interest on bank accounts is less than inflation, which is running at 3%, so private investors are raiding their accounts for money to speculate on stocks. One way to cool things down is to raise interest rates.