Economy Archives - Page 73 of 133 - the patient investor

December 26, 2013

Australian Made | SBS Insight

This discussion on SBS Insight from April 24th, 2012 covers the Australian manufacturing dilemna:

There are three major costs in manufacturing: material costs, labor costs and other operating expenses. Roughly equal in size. Material costs are roughly the same, whether you are in Australia or China. Labor costs are radically different, with labor costs of $15 compared to $1 in China. But Australia also can’t compete on other operating expenses, which are far higher because of the labor cost and related benefits…….I can’t see why Australia hasn’t got the sense to turn around. We have been on this path for 30 years…
~ Peter Rodeck, Australian manufacturer EnvironData.

December 24, 2013

The S&P 500 followed through above 1810, signaling another primary advance. Troughs high above zero on 13-week Twiggs Money Flow indicate strong long-term buying pressure. Short corrections such as the recent retracement are normally followed by strong gains, but there is no reliable method calculating targets in an accelerating up-trend. The target of 1910* calculated by the conventional method may well underestimate the advance.

S&P 500

* Target calculation: 1810 + ( 1810 – 1710 ) = 1910

My favorite bellwether, transport stock Fedex, is surging ahead on the monthly chart, suggesting a strong recovery for the US economy in the year ahead.

Fedex

CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) readings below 20 also suggest a bull market.

VIX Index

December 23, 2013

Russia 1998 crisis haunts Deutsche Bank analyst seeing China bust | Livemint

When the Deutsche Bank AG equity strategist [John-Paul Smith] looks at the country [China], he says he detects some of the same signs of a financial meltdown that led him to predict Russia’s 1998 stock market crash months in advance. China’s expansion is being fueled by soaring corporate borrowing, a high-risk model that needs to be replaced by the kind of free-market measures and budget cuts that fed Russia’s growth in the aftermath of the country’s default and subsequent 44% monthly tumble in the Micex Index, Smith said.

There is potential for a debt trap in industrial companies which can trigger an economy-wide financial crisis as early as next year, Smith said in an interview from London on 12 December, a day after he issued a report predicting China’s slowdown will lead to a 10% decline in emerging-market stocks next year. “If I am wrong on China, I am wrong on everything.”

December 21, 2013

Why Australian manufacturing is dying

The following graphs from the Productivity Commission Preliminary Report on Australia’s Automotive
Manufacturing Industry give an insight into the problems facing Australian manufacturers.

The first graph compares average hourly labor costs for auto-manufacturers in different countries. Australia is second-highest (behind Germany), in terms of labor cost per hour, and roughly 7 times as high as China and India — ignoring local ABS figures for which there are no comparatives.

Hourly Labor Costs

The second graph shows how the rising Australian Dollar has impacted on local auto-manufacturing.

Australian motor vehicle production compared to the trade weighted exchange rate

The local market is not big enough to sustain a competitive auto-manufacturing industry, but that argument does not seem to have hindered five of the top seven global manufacturers — Volkswagen, Hyundai, Toyota, Nissan and Honda — whose local markets are of a similar scale to our own. The difference is that they have adopted a global outlook rather than focusing on their own domestic market as Australia has done.

December 21, 2013

Productivity Commission report says Australian car makers can’t compete on labour costs

An increasing amount of the world’s cars are now built in countries such as Brazil, China, India, Mexico and Thailand, while countries such as Australia, the US, the UK and Belgium have shed workers since 2008.

The [Productivity Commission] report finds labour costs in Australia “relatively high”, although not substantially different to Germany or Japan. “But [they] are four times or more those of China, Thailand and other developing countries where motor vehicle production is expanding,” it found.

December 20, 2013

What Happens When Unemployment Benefits Are Cut? North Carolina Offers a Clue | WSJ

Cutting out benefits can reduce the jobless rate in two ways, says Mr. Feroli [Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at J.P. Morgan], pointing to past economic literature. Under the employment effect, people will take jobs even if the work pays less than the job seekers want. In the participation effect, people will drop out of the measured workforce since actively seeking a job (a criterion for being labeled officially unemployed) no longer carries an advantage of receiving jobless benefits.

December 10, 2013

Australian disease will be one for the text books | Macrobusiness.com.au

From Houses & Holes
at 9:01am on December 10, 2013:

While the nation continues to debate whether we should let this business go or bail out that business, the real issue continues to be ignored. Indeed it is so far off the radar that cheap shot commentators like Michael Pascoe can make wise cracks about it while the economy burns.

But it’s not funny. It’s not even a little bit amusing. Australians are being slaughtered by emerging markets; gutted by the Japanese; truncated by the Americans and butchered by the Europeans.

I am talking about the global currency war that we are comprehensively losing while having our backs turned.

Qantas, Graincorp, Holden, Electrolux. These are all iconic Australian businesses that have absolutely no reason to fail. Two are virtual monopolies that should be making money on a conveyor belt. The third and fourth are high tech industries that should be tailor made for a smart, developed economy.

But instead all four are failing because they can’t compete with leaner and meaner foreign operations.

Qantas can’t get cheap enough finance and has no access to cheap fuel the way Middle Eastern airlines do. Graincorp is saddled with out-dated infrastructure and can’t seem to raise the capital to renovate itself despite a supposed “dining boom”. Detroit has confessed that Holden is being pulled out owing to a structurally higher dollar and labour costs. Electrolux is the same.

Metals refining, surely an area in which we should have a distinct advantage, is also failing, with last week’s Gove refinery the latest casualty. Processed food exports haven’t grown since 2005 while raw agricultural foodstuffs have jumped. We’ve already lost half of our petrol refining capacity. The Productivity Commission nails all three for dragging down productivity growth owing to high wages, low investment and idle capacity (read the dollar):

As these various businesses pack up their kits, our manufacturing sector is headed for an unbelievable 5% of GDP, by far the lowest in the OECD (making Luxembourg look like an industrial powerhouse) and approaching or past a point at which the inability to produce material for ourselves is also a strategic risk.

Most disconcerting of all is that this is transpiring as we head into a great reckoning in the wider economy. The mining boom is ending, its fabulous capital wave is subsiding, its huge ramp up in employment is ebbing, and over the next three years it will recede as fast as any business investment correction in the last one hundred years. We’ve plenty more gas but are too expensive to extract it. Perth’s Magnolia LNG is headed to Louisiana to produce gas there instead.

The plan to build more unproductive houses to fill the void is a classic kick of the can, adding to capex briefly but adding nothing to productive capacity. In the mean time it keeps our wages and interest rate structure temporarily high and makes the underlying problem worse.

The prospects for productive Australian industry are waning daily. Yet the dollar is still sitting at 90 cents, boosted by the same countries’ central banks that are feasting on our production, and pouring Dutch disease into our ears while we sit back and debate which business is worth saving.

The issue is not who do we bail out. It is how do we reverse the trend of uncompetitiveness that is sweeping everything offshore that is not buried in, or cemented into, the ground. The currency must be actively lowered or it will only drop when the economy does, leaving us bereft of a rebound.

Australian disease is entering its terminal phase, and boy, is it going to be one for the text books.

Reproduced with permission from Macrobusiness.com.au

November 22, 2013

Why does QE taper spook the market if it will have no real impact?

Question received from CG about the impact of QE and Fed taper:

I’m not arguing against the data presented on the graph, but if true that most of the QE bond purchases are being parked by banks in interest-bearing, excess reserve deposits at the Fed, why do the markets get spooked every time there are whispers that the Fed is going to reduce QE?

The comment CG is referring to:

Currently, there is evidence of expansive monetary policy from the Fed, but the overall impact on the financial markets is muted. Most of the QE bond purchases are being parked by banks in interest-bearing, excess reserve deposits at the Fed. The chart below compares Fed balance sheet expansion (QE) to the increase in excess reserve deposits at the Fed.

A classic placebo effect, the Fed is well aware that the major benefit of their quantitative easing program is psychological: there is little monetary impact on the markets.

My answer:
The markets have no real reason to fear a QE taper. I think this is more psychological than physical. The current mind-set is:

If the Fed begins to taper, that marks the end of the bull market in bonds. Rising bond yields and higher long-term interest rates may slow industry investment and recovery of the housing market and this would be bad for the economy.

In other words, they still have a bearish outlook. At some point they will shift to the counter-argument:

QE taper and rising interest rates indicate Fed faith in the recovery and are a bullish sign for stocks. It also means the economy is reverting to a sustainable path.

The bottom-line is that markets are driven as much by emotion as by logic.

November 11, 2013

NAB Convertible Pref issue | FIIG

From FIIG Newswire:

National Australia Bank Limited (ASX:NAB) has announced to the ASX the issue of a listed, floating rate convertible preference share (\”CPS II\”) with an indicative dividend of 325 to 340 bps over the bank bill swap rate. NAB is seeking to raise $750,000,000 for general corporate purposes. APRA has confirmed that the CPS II will count as additional Tier 1 Capital, supporting the NAB\’s regulatory capital requirements.

A welcome move to see the big four banks raising more Tier 1 capital. My view is that TBTF banks should have a minimum leverage ratio of 10 percent — more than double the current 4 to 5 percent.

Ending Too Big to Fail | The Big Picture

From an address by William C. Dudley, President of the NY Fed, to the Global Economic Policy Forum, November 8, 2013:

There is evidence of deep-seated cultural and ethical failures at many large financial institutions. Whether this is due to size and complexity, bad incentives or some other issues is difficult to judge, but it is another critical problem that needs to be addressed. Tough enforcement and high penalties will certainly help focus management’s attention on this issue. But I am also hopeful that ending too big to fail and shifting the emphasis to longer-term sustainability will encourage the needed cultural shift necessary to restore public trust in the industry.

Dudley calls for increased capital requirements to reduce the risk of failure as well as more robust procedures to reduce the impact of a single large failure:

The major initiative here is the single point of entry framework for resolution proposed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. Under this framework, if a financial firm is to be resolved under Title II of the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC will place the top tier bank holding company into receivership and its assets will be transferred to a bridge holding company. The equity holders will be wiped out and sufficient long-term unsecured debt will be converted into equity in the new bridge company to cover any remaining losses and to ensure that the new entity is well capitalized and deemed creditworthy. Subsidiaries would continue to operate, which should limit the incentives for customers to run. By assigning losses to shareholders and unsecured creditors of the holding company and transferring sound operating subsidiaries to a new solvent entity, such a “top-down” resolution strategy should ensure continuity with respect to any critical services performed by the firm’s subsidiaries and this should help limit the magnitude of any negative externalities.

Category: Economy