Consumerism, if it doesn't define the US, certainly describes it. The marketing that it spawns drives our political campaigns and pays for most sports, newspapers, magazines, radio, television and internet sites.
Advertisements try to convince us to buy products and services that we don't need, or undo brand loyalty to increase market share.
I am fairly sure that, as disposable income dries up, the dirty secret at the heart of the marketing sector will kill or cripple it.
The secret: It probably doesn't work!
I have been reading some mathematical papers on marketing. It is well-known that new marketing campaigns lead to increased sales, but only for a while. When this data is discussed, two factors are not considered:
1. The cost of the campaign itself is not factored into the increased sales.
2. There is no attempt made to check how much of the increased business is simply consumers buying earlier than they would have otherwise.
Since the manufacturers relies on marketing firms for their research, and the latter have a vested interest in the results, it is no surprise that these slip under the radar.
In other words, the sector is a huge bubble which, unlike investment or housing, has absolutely nothing backing it up!
Friday, February 27, 2009
Niall Ferguson's rivers-of-blood prophecy
Read Niall Ferguson as edited by Jesse - he talks straight.
About the only bit I don't quite agree with, is the ending - the note of hope is blasted too early in this battle. We are not going to stay in 1995, I'm quite confident about that; and one of the causes/consequences will be capital flight from/strike in America.
E.g.: "China, concerned about their U.S. reserves being devalued by U.S. monetary policy, is exchanging their holdings for long-term oil contracts from countries all over the world, locking in oil prices at exceptional levels, like the $11.40/barrel estimate for the Russian deal."
The elite, and foreign investors, will take care of what's left of their billions. Wealth will flee from inflation and taxation. Somewhere around the world will appear a new Liechtenstein.
Maybe in the calmer end of the Arab Street. Let's see American tax authorities try to lay down the law there.
About the only bit I don't quite agree with, is the ending - the note of hope is blasted too early in this battle. We are not going to stay in 1995, I'm quite confident about that; and one of the causes/consequences will be capital flight from/strike in America.
E.g.: "China, concerned about their U.S. reserves being devalued by U.S. monetary policy, is exchanging their holdings for long-term oil contracts from countries all over the world, locking in oil prices at exceptional levels, like the $11.40/barrel estimate for the Russian deal."
The elite, and foreign investors, will take care of what's left of their billions. Wealth will flee from inflation and taxation. Somewhere around the world will appear a new Liechtenstein.
Maybe in the calmer end of the Arab Street. Let's see American tax authorities try to lay down the law there.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Still a bear, for now
A letter to the Spectator (unpublished), posted here on 2nd November 2008. We seem to be edging towards the "unsurprising", though the market may give a leap of denial before then:
Sir:
Your leader (“Riders On The Storm”, 1 November) suggests that current investor sentiment is “excessively negative”. That depends upon one’s historical perspective, in both directions.
A reversion to the mean (over the last generation) for UK house prices would be some 3.5 times household income, which on 2007 figures would imply average valuations around £120,000. Turning to shares, the progress of the Dow over the past 80 years (adjusted for consumer prices) indicates that a return to 6,000 points should be unsurprising, and a low of 4,000 not impossible.
But in addition to the business cycle and recurrent bubbles, there are deep linear changes at work. While maintaining the Western consumer in his fantasy of idle wealth, the East has been building up its human and physical industrial resources. We are focussing on the present recession, but not what the world will look like afterwards. When Asia has sufficiently developed its domestic demand, it will lose its enthusiasm for US Treasury debt, and the credit markets will tear at our economies with higher interest rates. Already, the search is well under way for an alternative to the US dollar as a world trading currency; and foreign investors, sovereign wealth funds and oil-rich governments are building up holdings in our bellwether businesses (e.g. Barclays Bank), thus converting imbalance into equity and exporting our future dividends.
Besides, the Dow and FTSE companies derive an increasing proportion of their income from abroad, so stock indices no longer reflect national prosperity. Real wages have stalled, and seem set to decline against a background of rising inflation and global competition; this, plus an interest rate correction, might strengthen the downward trend for house prices.
In short, successive governments have failed to repair our economic structure, and bear market rallies notwithstanding, I think we must eventually recalibrate our measures of normality.
Sir:
Your leader (“Riders On The Storm”, 1 November) suggests that current investor sentiment is “excessively negative”. That depends upon one’s historical perspective, in both directions.
A reversion to the mean (over the last generation) for UK house prices would be some 3.5 times household income, which on 2007 figures would imply average valuations around £120,000. Turning to shares, the progress of the Dow over the past 80 years (adjusted for consumer prices) indicates that a return to 6,000 points should be unsurprising, and a low of 4,000 not impossible.
But in addition to the business cycle and recurrent bubbles, there are deep linear changes at work. While maintaining the Western consumer in his fantasy of idle wealth, the East has been building up its human and physical industrial resources. We are focussing on the present recession, but not what the world will look like afterwards. When Asia has sufficiently developed its domestic demand, it will lose its enthusiasm for US Treasury debt, and the credit markets will tear at our economies with higher interest rates. Already, the search is well under way for an alternative to the US dollar as a world trading currency; and foreign investors, sovereign wealth funds and oil-rich governments are building up holdings in our bellwether businesses (e.g. Barclays Bank), thus converting imbalance into equity and exporting our future dividends.
Besides, the Dow and FTSE companies derive an increasing proportion of their income from abroad, so stock indices no longer reflect national prosperity. Real wages have stalled, and seem set to decline against a background of rising inflation and global competition; this, plus an interest rate correction, might strengthen the downward trend for house prices.
In short, successive governments have failed to repair our economic structure, and bear market rallies notwithstanding, I think we must eventually recalibrate our measures of normality.
Darwin's Bicentennial
The 'balance of Nature' is a misleading phrase. It is not a Disney-esque harmony, but the sweaty struggle of wrestlers, with efficiency of predation competing with that of procreation. A small change in environment, or the introduction of a new disease or species can lead to rapid extinction.
If an ecological niche opens, or gains resources, there is an explosion of varieties. When resources are abundant and predators scarce, even the weaker ones can thrive for a while. This explains the fat, waddling dodo.
The Industrial Revolution, and the Agricultural one that came before it, were the product of a few minds, and the sweat of many. They drove the move to more cities, which meant larger companies and bigger government. This widened the niche for a parasitic class of people who produce nothing, but are sometimes necessary. We call them consultants, middle managers, investment specialists (sorry Sackerson!), marketing gurus, guidance and life coaches, and the like.
With no predators, and a virtually infinite supply of resources (they print the money!), this class grew like a cancer. We have now reached the point that it consumes most of what we produce, and the system is shutting down. Since the typical politician or bureaucrat is of this class, the obvious answer is to give them more. Hence the Bush stimulus package.
I could be wrong, but I think that we are simply postponing the inevitable.
If an ecological niche opens, or gains resources, there is an explosion of varieties. When resources are abundant and predators scarce, even the weaker ones can thrive for a while. This explains the fat, waddling dodo.
The Industrial Revolution, and the Agricultural one that came before it, were the product of a few minds, and the sweat of many. They drove the move to more cities, which meant larger companies and bigger government. This widened the niche for a parasitic class of people who produce nothing, but are sometimes necessary. We call them consultants, middle managers, investment specialists (sorry Sackerson!), marketing gurus, guidance and life coaches, and the like.
With no predators, and a virtually infinite supply of resources (they print the money!), this class grew like a cancer. We have now reached the point that it consumes most of what we produce, and the system is shutting down. Since the typical politician or bureaucrat is of this class, the obvious answer is to give them more. Hence the Bush stimulus package.
I could be wrong, but I think that we are simply postponing the inevitable.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Dow update
Adjusted for CPI inflation, the Dow is now back to where it was in December 1995.
This is still above the peak of the previous long cycle, ending in January 1966 - and still over 4 times higher than the low of July 1982. We only think of it as catastrophic because we got used to more recent, wildly inflated valuations.
I'm still hoping that the end position will be no worse than 4,000 points - a drop of 45% from today's close.
This is still above the peak of the previous long cycle, ending in January 1966 - and still over 4 times higher than the low of July 1982. We only think of it as catastrophic because we got used to more recent, wildly inflated valuations.
I'm still hoping that the end position will be no worse than 4,000 points - a drop of 45% from today's close.
Theft by inflation has begun already
The UK Debt Management Office website shows that a UK Treasury bond offering 5% annual interest is, because of its current traded price, actually yielding 2.522793%.
But the risk of default, almost as high as Italy's government debt and far higher than even the USA's, is (as Jesse quotes) currently priced at 1.63%. (The market currently prices the risk of USA default at 1%.)
So after insuring for risk, 5-year UK sovereign debt earns you less than 0.893%.
Inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index*, now runs at 3%. In other words, a "safe" government bond loses you more than 2% a year.
And that's before inflation really gets going.
_____________________________________
*The Retail Price Index is a different measure of inflation, which takes into account mortgage costs. So after recent savage cuts in the bank rate, currently RPI should be negative. But wait until the private capital credit strike leads to higher interest rates, and judge.
But the risk of default, almost as high as Italy's government debt and far higher than even the USA's, is (as Jesse quotes) currently priced at 1.63%. (The market currently prices the risk of USA default at 1%.)
So after insuring for risk, 5-year UK sovereign debt earns you less than 0.893%.
Inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price Index*, now runs at 3%. In other words, a "safe" government bond loses you more than 2% a year.
And that's before inflation really gets going.
_____________________________________
*The Retail Price Index is a different measure of inflation, which takes into account mortgage costs. So after recent savage cuts in the bank rate, currently RPI should be negative. But wait until the private capital credit strike leads to higher interest rates, and judge.
How long will the bear market last?
Jesse quotes this comparison of the current bear market with three previous ones, mixing stats for the Dow and the S&P 500:
I'd suggest we should look at when the recent bubble really burst - end 1999, then desperately disguised by monetary inflation from 2002/03 onwards; if that's right, we have maybe another 6 years to go through.
But taking similar periods for the Dow only, adjusting for CPI inflation, and adding the long period from 1966 to 1982, we get this:
I'd suggest we should look at when the recent bubble really burst - end 1999, then desperately disguised by monetary inflation from 2002/03 onwards; if that's right, we have maybe another 6 years to go through. The shapes of these two lines do sort of rhyme, don't they? And if so, looking at where the end of the red line is, maybe a bear market rally is now due, like the c. '75 - '76 mini-recovery.
End point in real terms this time, my guess, is the equivalent of 4,000 points today. However, there are features unique to the present situation, especially the size of debts, the loss of much of the West's manufacturing base, and the interconnectedness of modern world markets and economies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)