In April 2009, Bill Ackman of Pershing Square Capital Management said America had suffered "the equivalent of a heart attack, but now we are in recovery, hopefully. It takes time to heal."
Fast forward 13 months and, "yes," America has healed, Ackman says.
Furthermore, "I think the market's not particularly expensive," the famed activist hedge fund manager declares. "Look at large-cap, very high quality businesses today [and] they seem pretty cheap to me. "
Much to everyone's surprise - including Ackman's - those "very high quality businesses" include Citigroup. On Wednesday, the day after Treasury announced the sale of 1.5 billion shares of Citi stock, Ackman stunned Wall Street by revealing his firm has taken a big stake in the big bank.
With theatrical flair, Ackman made the announcement as a throwaway line at the end of his presentation at the 15th annual Ira Sohn investment research conference in New York: "And by the way, we bought about 150 million shares of Citigroup, but I don't have time to talk about it," he said, according to multiple reports.
And by the way, when Ackman and Bloomberg reporter Christine Richard joined us this morning to talk about Confidence Game, a new book about Ackman's public battle with MBIA (and regulators), I just had to ask him about the Citigroup position.
The Bull Case for Citigroup
"If you had asked me a year ago ‘could I conceive of owning Citi 12 months later?', I couldn't conceive of owning the company," he says. "It was hard for me to even look at it in light of a year ago."
Upon further review - and while admitting "there are still question marks" -- Ackman determined Citi was attractive based (in part) on the following:
-- Money Talks: Thanks in large part to the government's conversion of its preferred stake in Citi to common stock in 2009, Citigroup is "probably one of the best capitalized banks today, ironically," Ackman says.
-- Free Money Is Even Better: Because Ben Bernanke has kept the fed funds rate effectively at zero, banks like Citigroup "effectively they've got free money," Ackman says. Furthermore, "it's a great time to make loans - they can earn attractive spreads" because collateral values are down and lending standards are up.
-- Franchise Value: Despite hits to its reputation in recent years, Citigroup still has a "great deposit franchise" and a "very well capitalized balance sheet," the fund manager says. In addition, he notes off camera Citi has less exposure to home equity loans than most of its big competitors.
In sum, "it's really a great time to be in the banking business," Ackman says.
Watch the accompanying video for more about Ackman's take on Citigroup, General Growth Properties and other investments -- and stay tuned for additional segments where Ackman and Richards discuss Confidence Game and the ongoing war against the shorts.
Monday, May 31, 2010
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Five Reasons to Love Bank Stocks
I was practically all alone on March 18 when I gave you five reasons to steer clear of bank stocks , but it turns out heeding that advice would not have been such a bad idea.
The SPDR KBW Bank ETF, which counts Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo JPMorgan Chase and US Bancorp as its top five holdings, was at $26.01 when I wrote my story.
While it would hit a high of $29.22 on April 21, it touched a recent low at $23.33 Tuesday. Two reasons I highlighted, "Regulatory Threats Resurface" and "European Contagion," look especially smart. So give me an A for insight and a C+ for timing.
> > Bull or Bear? Vote in Our Poll
Now that everyone is freaking out about bank stocks, it may be worth taking another look at the sector, which for current purposes also includes Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. They have been a big part of the recent selloff, and they may have more in common with JPMorgan, Bank of America and Citigroup than any of those three does with Wells Fargo, or certainly US Bancorp.
There are plenty of reasons to be a bull on banks. Here are a few.
5. The U.S. Economy Is Improving
The recent selloff, not just in bank stocks but in global equities, has had nothing to do with any signals in the U.S. economy. It's been all about European countries like Greece, Spain, Ireland and Portugal struggling under heavy debt loads, with a pinch of fear about overzealous regulators thrown in. There may also just be a general fear that equities have come too far too fast and those things provided an excuse for selling.
Meanwhile, things in the U.S. continue to mend. Since hitting a high of 10.6% in January, the U.S. unemployment rate is down to 9.5%. The steep rise in the chart shown here demonstrates that we've already had a historic rise in layoffs and hiring freezes. Employers freaked out, now they are hiring again, and it's hard to think of any single thing that could be more bullish for bank stocks. Sometimes it pays to keep it simple.
4. Regulatory Fears Are Overblown Probably the biggest surprise about the regulatory reform legislation that passed the Senate earlier this month was a provision sponsored by Blanche Lincoln (D., Ark.) that would force banks to spin off their derivatives businesses.
Derivatives are a huge profit center for banks like Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase. It is not entirely clear whether the Senate legislation would eliminate their ability to trade, sell and design derivatives altogether, or merely sharply curtail those activities. In any case, the result would be disastrous, and a JPMorgan report Thursday estimates the Lincoln provision would halve the 2011 return on equity for Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs.
Even that dire prediction may be too sanguine. One former Federal Reserve official I spoke with fears the provision would make it impossible for banks to hedge their mortgage portfolios, which would create big problems for home lending in the U.S. It also could raise questions about the ability of multinational corporations in a wide range of industries to hedge against commodity and currency risks.
Many of these fears are, to an extent, priced into stocks, and into bank stocks in particular. If the Lincoln provision becomes law, the stocks will trade down further, but if the impact is really so dire as to shut off home lending, or keep McDonald's from doing business around the globe, Congress will be forced to fix it. More likely, though, is that the provision never becomes law.
The White House downplays it and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.) doesn't seem to like it much. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has also opposed it. Lawmakers are essentially just working out a way to kill it without seeming like they are sucking up to the banks. They will find it eventually, and when they do, bank stocks will rally.
3. Low Tax Bills Ahead
As the accompanying graphic shows, many banks won't be paying taxes for a year or, in some cases, many years. That is especially true for banks that lost a lot of money during the crisis, which is to say, nearly every bank! All the potential write-offs mean yesterday's losers reap big savings when they become profitable again, and few industries lost more money than banking in recent years.
Bank Analysis
Five Bank Stock Bargains
Looking at a term called net deferred tax assets is a good way to figure out how much in losses and other items companies can apply toward reducing their tax bills in the future, according to corporate tax consultant Robert Willens. Though banks already count this number as an asset that is reflected in book value, Willens nonetheless believes the issue is poorly understood and may not be fully reflected in companies' share prices.
Not reflected in book value is something called a valuation allowance. That refers to losses banks aren't counting as an asset because accounting rules require them to demonstrate a better than 50% probability they will be able to earn enough to use the loss as a write-off. If earnings prove stronger than expected, banks can release capital they have to hold against that valuation allowance, leading to a rise in book value.
2. Worries About Europe Are Excessive
Fiscally stronger European countries like Germany have made a major commitment to support weaker ones like Greece. This is not a small thing, and it will go a long way to providing stability on the continent. Longer term, you may see some weaker countries drop out of the euro, but that's at least a couple of years off.
For all their size, even the largest U.S. banks like Wells Fargo, JPMorgan and Bank of America have essentially no European exposure when it comes to retail businesses, like credit cards or mortgage lending. Wealth management and business lending is minuscule. Even investment banking and business lending operations pale in comparison to the size of their counterparts in the U.S. and other parts of the world. Even Citigroup, traditionally the most global of large U.S. banks, is far from a major player in Europe.
1. Everyone Is Selling
Though bank stocks, like the rest of the market, have showed some signs of life this week, fear has clearly injected itself into the market. The mantra of Sage of Omaha Warren Buffett that it pays to be greedy when others are fearful and fearful when others are greedy proves itself time and again. The trick, of course, is knowing whether people are going to get more fearful before they start to get greedy again. You can never know for sure, which is why you simply have to add risk compared to where you were when the market was higher a month ago.
The SPDR KBW Bank ETF has roughly matched the Dow Jones Industrial Average in the selloff of the past month, but it has sharply outperformed the Dow since markets rebounded off their lows in March 2009. When the markets resume their climb, bank stocks are sure to outperform.
The SPDR KBW Bank ETF, which counts Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo JPMorgan Chase and US Bancorp as its top five holdings, was at $26.01 when I wrote my story.
While it would hit a high of $29.22 on April 21, it touched a recent low at $23.33 Tuesday. Two reasons I highlighted, "Regulatory Threats Resurface" and "European Contagion," look especially smart. So give me an A for insight and a C+ for timing.
> > Bull or Bear? Vote in Our Poll
Now that everyone is freaking out about bank stocks, it may be worth taking another look at the sector, which for current purposes also includes Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. They have been a big part of the recent selloff, and they may have more in common with JPMorgan, Bank of America and Citigroup than any of those three does with Wells Fargo, or certainly US Bancorp.
There are plenty of reasons to be a bull on banks. Here are a few.
5. The U.S. Economy Is Improving
The recent selloff, not just in bank stocks but in global equities, has had nothing to do with any signals in the U.S. economy. It's been all about European countries like Greece, Spain, Ireland and Portugal struggling under heavy debt loads, with a pinch of fear about overzealous regulators thrown in. There may also just be a general fear that equities have come too far too fast and those things provided an excuse for selling.
Meanwhile, things in the U.S. continue to mend. Since hitting a high of 10.6% in January, the U.S. unemployment rate is down to 9.5%. The steep rise in the chart shown here demonstrates that we've already had a historic rise in layoffs and hiring freezes. Employers freaked out, now they are hiring again, and it's hard to think of any single thing that could be more bullish for bank stocks. Sometimes it pays to keep it simple.
4. Regulatory Fears Are Overblown Probably the biggest surprise about the regulatory reform legislation that passed the Senate earlier this month was a provision sponsored by Blanche Lincoln (D., Ark.) that would force banks to spin off their derivatives businesses.
Derivatives are a huge profit center for banks like Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and JPMorgan Chase. It is not entirely clear whether the Senate legislation would eliminate their ability to trade, sell and design derivatives altogether, or merely sharply curtail those activities. In any case, the result would be disastrous, and a JPMorgan report Thursday estimates the Lincoln provision would halve the 2011 return on equity for Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs.
Even that dire prediction may be too sanguine. One former Federal Reserve official I spoke with fears the provision would make it impossible for banks to hedge their mortgage portfolios, which would create big problems for home lending in the U.S. It also could raise questions about the ability of multinational corporations in a wide range of industries to hedge against commodity and currency risks.
Many of these fears are, to an extent, priced into stocks, and into bank stocks in particular. If the Lincoln provision becomes law, the stocks will trade down further, but if the impact is really so dire as to shut off home lending, or keep McDonald's from doing business around the globe, Congress will be forced to fix it. More likely, though, is that the provision never becomes law.
The White House downplays it and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank (D., Mass.) doesn't seem to like it much. Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke has also opposed it. Lawmakers are essentially just working out a way to kill it without seeming like they are sucking up to the banks. They will find it eventually, and when they do, bank stocks will rally.
3. Low Tax Bills Ahead
As the accompanying graphic shows, many banks won't be paying taxes for a year or, in some cases, many years. That is especially true for banks that lost a lot of money during the crisis, which is to say, nearly every bank! All the potential write-offs mean yesterday's losers reap big savings when they become profitable again, and few industries lost more money than banking in recent years.
Bank Analysis
Five Bank Stock Bargains
Looking at a term called net deferred tax assets is a good way to figure out how much in losses and other items companies can apply toward reducing their tax bills in the future, according to corporate tax consultant Robert Willens. Though banks already count this number as an asset that is reflected in book value, Willens nonetheless believes the issue is poorly understood and may not be fully reflected in companies' share prices.
Not reflected in book value is something called a valuation allowance. That refers to losses banks aren't counting as an asset because accounting rules require them to demonstrate a better than 50% probability they will be able to earn enough to use the loss as a write-off. If earnings prove stronger than expected, banks can release capital they have to hold against that valuation allowance, leading to a rise in book value.
2. Worries About Europe Are Excessive
Fiscally stronger European countries like Germany have made a major commitment to support weaker ones like Greece. This is not a small thing, and it will go a long way to providing stability on the continent. Longer term, you may see some weaker countries drop out of the euro, but that's at least a couple of years off.
For all their size, even the largest U.S. banks like Wells Fargo, JPMorgan and Bank of America have essentially no European exposure when it comes to retail businesses, like credit cards or mortgage lending. Wealth management and business lending is minuscule. Even investment banking and business lending operations pale in comparison to the size of their counterparts in the U.S. and other parts of the world. Even Citigroup, traditionally the most global of large U.S. banks, is far from a major player in Europe.
1. Everyone Is Selling
Though bank stocks, like the rest of the market, have showed some signs of life this week, fear has clearly injected itself into the market. The mantra of Sage of Omaha Warren Buffett that it pays to be greedy when others are fearful and fearful when others are greedy proves itself time and again. The trick, of course, is knowing whether people are going to get more fearful before they start to get greedy again. You can never know for sure, which is why you simply have to add risk compared to where you were when the market was higher a month ago.
The SPDR KBW Bank ETF has roughly matched the Dow Jones Industrial Average in the selloff of the past month, but it has sharply outperformed the Dow since markets rebounded off their lows in March 2009. When the markets resume their climb, bank stocks are sure to outperform.
For Patient Investors, Another Window to Buy
The correction that made such a brief appearance two weeks ago has returned, this time apparently to stay. For me and anyone following the Common Sense system, that means opportunity.
Last week, the Nasdaq dropped convincingly below the Common Sense buying threshold, which is a 10% decline from the most recent high reached on April 23. The S&P 500 also dropped more than 10% from its peak, putting both major averages into an official correction, the first since the bull market began its rise on March 10, 2009. The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped below the 10% correction threshold Thursday, returned above the line Friday and fell back below it again Monday. The Common Sense approach calls for buying on corrections of 10%, and selling after rallies of 25%.
Just two weeks ago I fretted that a buying opportunity had come and gone so fast I was unable to take advantage of it. The $1 trillion rescue plan unveiled by the European Union and the International Monetary Fund had triggered a huge rally, and it looked like the bull market was back. I needn't have worried. European sovereign worries have returned with a vengeance. Not only did the market's plunge renew a buying opportunity, but indexes fell so rapidly last week that the Nasdaq Composite was well below the 10% threshold on Thursday, when I made some purchases.
This is yet another reminder to remain focused on the long term and not get caught up in the minute-by-minute or even daily gyrations of the stock market. I've said for months that eventually there would be a correction, and not just one lasting a few minutes.
Having gone through three successive selling opportunities during the past year, I had ample cash at my disposal. (I generally sell roughly 10% of my portfolio at each selling opportunity and spend about 20% of my cash at each buying window.) In deciding what to buy, I simply followed the advice I've offered in recent columns. One strategy was to add exposure to commercial real estate, a sector I'd shunned as overvalued but recently concluded showed promise. I'll give a more detailed report on my real estate strategy in a future column, but one component was simply to buy a diversified exchange-traded fund, the Vanguard REIT Index Fund.
For stocks, I focused on some of my own recent recommendations in the technology sector. Despite generally solid earnings, the tech sector has corrected more severely than the broad market. I bought long-term Apple calls at only a modest premium to the current price (I already have a position in Apple shares), as well as the PowerShares QQQ exchange-traded fund, which approximates the performance of the Nasdaq. I've been impressed recently with strong earnings from big technology concerns like Intel, Cisco Systems, and Oracle, which account for three of the fund's top 10 holdings.
I also raised cash by selling some Google puts. This is the first time I've sold puts in over a year. (Selling puts means you agree to buy shares at the strike price if they're trading below that price when they expire.) It's a strategy I recommend when option prices are high (such as when the VIX has jumped, as it did last week) and when I expect shares to rally. If you really hope to own the shares, I find you're better off buying them outright or buying calls. I wouldn't mind owning Google at the strike price, but since I already have a substantial position, I'm also happy to simply keep the cash should the puts expire above the strike price.
I did all these transactions last Thursday afternoon, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average was heading toward a 376-point one-day loss. With the previous brief correction fresh in my mind, I moved quickly in case the window proved fleeting. I needn't have; stocks were still in correction territory this week.
My reaction illustrates the persistence of psychological factors, even after years of investing. Why was I so concerned this correction would be brief? After waiting more than a year for a buying opportunity, the rising market has conditioned me to expect more of the same: a brief correction followed by the return of the bull. I was eager to put money to work and get it out of low-yielding money-market funds. And yet I realized my eagerness should have been tempered by the likelihood that this may not be the last correction. If history is any guide, the fact that there hasn't been a correction for so long increases the chances that there will be another 10% decline.
So I still have cash in reserve. As usual, I'm making no short-term predictions about the direction of the market. My goal is simply to be prepared when opportunities present themselves, as they did last week.
Last week, the Nasdaq dropped convincingly below the Common Sense buying threshold, which is a 10% decline from the most recent high reached on April 23. The S&P 500 also dropped more than 10% from its peak, putting both major averages into an official correction, the first since the bull market began its rise on March 10, 2009. The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped below the 10% correction threshold Thursday, returned above the line Friday and fell back below it again Monday. The Common Sense approach calls for buying on corrections of 10%, and selling after rallies of 25%.
Just two weeks ago I fretted that a buying opportunity had come and gone so fast I was unable to take advantage of it. The $1 trillion rescue plan unveiled by the European Union and the International Monetary Fund had triggered a huge rally, and it looked like the bull market was back. I needn't have worried. European sovereign worries have returned with a vengeance. Not only did the market's plunge renew a buying opportunity, but indexes fell so rapidly last week that the Nasdaq Composite was well below the 10% threshold on Thursday, when I made some purchases.
This is yet another reminder to remain focused on the long term and not get caught up in the minute-by-minute or even daily gyrations of the stock market. I've said for months that eventually there would be a correction, and not just one lasting a few minutes.
Having gone through three successive selling opportunities during the past year, I had ample cash at my disposal. (I generally sell roughly 10% of my portfolio at each selling opportunity and spend about 20% of my cash at each buying window.) In deciding what to buy, I simply followed the advice I've offered in recent columns. One strategy was to add exposure to commercial real estate, a sector I'd shunned as overvalued but recently concluded showed promise. I'll give a more detailed report on my real estate strategy in a future column, but one component was simply to buy a diversified exchange-traded fund, the Vanguard REIT Index Fund.
For stocks, I focused on some of my own recent recommendations in the technology sector. Despite generally solid earnings, the tech sector has corrected more severely than the broad market. I bought long-term Apple calls at only a modest premium to the current price (I already have a position in Apple shares), as well as the PowerShares QQQ exchange-traded fund, which approximates the performance of the Nasdaq. I've been impressed recently with strong earnings from big technology concerns like Intel, Cisco Systems, and Oracle, which account for three of the fund's top 10 holdings.
I also raised cash by selling some Google puts. This is the first time I've sold puts in over a year. (Selling puts means you agree to buy shares at the strike price if they're trading below that price when they expire.) It's a strategy I recommend when option prices are high (such as when the VIX has jumped, as it did last week) and when I expect shares to rally. If you really hope to own the shares, I find you're better off buying them outright or buying calls. I wouldn't mind owning Google at the strike price, but since I already have a substantial position, I'm also happy to simply keep the cash should the puts expire above the strike price.
I did all these transactions last Thursday afternoon, as the Dow Jones Industrial Average was heading toward a 376-point one-day loss. With the previous brief correction fresh in my mind, I moved quickly in case the window proved fleeting. I needn't have; stocks were still in correction territory this week.
My reaction illustrates the persistence of psychological factors, even after years of investing. Why was I so concerned this correction would be brief? After waiting more than a year for a buying opportunity, the rising market has conditioned me to expect more of the same: a brief correction followed by the return of the bull. I was eager to put money to work and get it out of low-yielding money-market funds. And yet I realized my eagerness should have been tempered by the likelihood that this may not be the last correction. If history is any guide, the fact that there hasn't been a correction for so long increases the chances that there will be another 10% decline.
So I still have cash in reserve. As usual, I'm making no short-term predictions about the direction of the market. My goal is simply to be prepared when opportunities present themselves, as they did last week.
Monday, February 8, 2010
The Fed's "Exit Plan" Is Just Another Secret Gift To Wall Street
The Fed is planning to detail its "exit plan" this week, the WSJ says. This exit plan is the means by which the Fed will gradually reverse the tremendous stimulus it is still pumping into the economy and financial system.
As we've noted often over the past year, the Fed is in a bind. During the financial crisis, it bought hundreds of billions of dollars of real-estate and other assets from banks to reduce mortgage rates and ease the pressure on bank balance sheets. This, in turn, pumped hundreds of billions of new dollars into the economy, which has enabled the banks--and bankers--to make a killing over the past year. The question is how the Fed can reverse this stimulus without killing the economy.
The idea behind giving the banks cheap money was that the banks would lend it to consumers and businesses. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened: Since the start of the crisis, bank lending has fallen off a cliff. The banks are, however, lending to the Federal government, which needs to fund record deficits by borrowing more than $1 trillion a year. The combination of the Fed's desire to stimulate lending via cheap money and the government's desire to stimulate the economy by running a huge deficit has made it a great time to be a bank: Banks can borrow from the government at artificially cheap rates and then lend the money back to the Federal government at higher rates, pocketing the difference.
And now it's going to get even better to be a bank.
Why?
Because the first part of the Fed's exit plan will reportedly be to increase the amount of interest the Fed pays on "excess reserves."
Banks are required to keep a certain percentage of their assets in cash at the Federal Reserve. Any cash above this required amount is "excess reserves," and the Fed is currently paying 0.25% interest on these reserves. The Fed's exit plan will call for increasing this interest rate, to encourage the banks to keep more money in excess reserves instead of lending it into to the economy and thus expanding the money supply.
The idea here is that, by increasing the amount of money on account at the Fed, the Fed will reduce the amount of money that gets loaned out to businesses and consumers, thus forestalling inflation. Increasing interest paid on excess reserves will also put off the day that the Fed has to start selling its real-estate assets back to banks, a process that might create taxpayer losses and raise mortgage rates, which the Fed is loathe to do.
Of course, in the process of increasing interest paid on reserves, the Fed will be paying banks even more not to lend. In the process, it will be giving banks yet another way to take nearly free money from the taxpayer and give it back to the government at a higher rate--and then pocket the difference.
It's a great time to be a banker.
As we've noted often over the past year, the Fed is in a bind. During the financial crisis, it bought hundreds of billions of dollars of real-estate and other assets from banks to reduce mortgage rates and ease the pressure on bank balance sheets. This, in turn, pumped hundreds of billions of new dollars into the economy, which has enabled the banks--and bankers--to make a killing over the past year. The question is how the Fed can reverse this stimulus without killing the economy.
The idea behind giving the banks cheap money was that the banks would lend it to consumers and businesses. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened: Since the start of the crisis, bank lending has fallen off a cliff. The banks are, however, lending to the Federal government, which needs to fund record deficits by borrowing more than $1 trillion a year. The combination of the Fed's desire to stimulate lending via cheap money and the government's desire to stimulate the economy by running a huge deficit has made it a great time to be a bank: Banks can borrow from the government at artificially cheap rates and then lend the money back to the Federal government at higher rates, pocketing the difference.
And now it's going to get even better to be a bank.
Why?
Because the first part of the Fed's exit plan will reportedly be to increase the amount of interest the Fed pays on "excess reserves."
Banks are required to keep a certain percentage of their assets in cash at the Federal Reserve. Any cash above this required amount is "excess reserves," and the Fed is currently paying 0.25% interest on these reserves. The Fed's exit plan will call for increasing this interest rate, to encourage the banks to keep more money in excess reserves instead of lending it into to the economy and thus expanding the money supply.
The idea here is that, by increasing the amount of money on account at the Fed, the Fed will reduce the amount of money that gets loaned out to businesses and consumers, thus forestalling inflation. Increasing interest paid on excess reserves will also put off the day that the Fed has to start selling its real-estate assets back to banks, a process that might create taxpayer losses and raise mortgage rates, which the Fed is loathe to do.
Of course, in the process of increasing interest paid on reserves, the Fed will be paying banks even more not to lend. In the process, it will be giving banks yet another way to take nearly free money from the taxpayer and give it back to the government at a higher rate--and then pocket the difference.
It's a great time to be a banker.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Ten reasons why dry bulk will fly
We have become more confident that the dry bulk rally has legs for the rest ofthe year. As freight rates rise, asset values will rise and help lift the valuations of drybulk shares. Investors should take advantage of the current summer drift in the Baltic Dry Index to accumulate dry bulk stocks.
Here are 10 reasons.
• Reason 1: Crude steel production in China is expected to rise 8.2% to hit 540m tonnes as the economic stimulus measures take effect.
• Reason 2: China is expected to continue relying on imported iron ore for the majority of its consumption because the current price premium of imported iron ore over domestic sources is not excessive given the higher quality.
• Reason 3: China’s iron ore inventories at ports are low relative to its increased consumption of imported ore, despite testing previous highs on an absolute basis.
• Reason 4: Brazilian iron ore exports may take off in 2H09 and increase tonne mile demand. With Australian production already at close to full capacity, any further increase in global iron ore demand could draw additional shipments from Brazil and increase tonne-mile demand, thereby boosting dry bulk shipping rates.
• Reason 5: Europe, Russia, Japan and the US will restart blast furnaces as apparent steel demand is higher than the current level of production.
• Reason 6: Growth of property starts in China has finally gone into positive territory, suggesting that demand for construction steel is set to expand.
• Reason 7: China’s demand for and production of flat steel products should also be boosted by continuing expansion of automobile sales and the recent positive trend observed for sales of white goods.
• Reason 8: Steel inventories have declined across the globe while steel prices are rising. These are powerful incentives for steel mills to restart production.
• Reason 9: China and Japan may see higher coal imports in 2H since Chinese electricity production growth is back in the black while Japan’s coal imports should start to recover with the expected expansion of industrial production in 2H.
• Reason 10: The idle fleet of bulkers currently stands at just 5% of the total fleet,with the vast majority being ships more than 20 years old. This means that the idle fleet of modern tonnage is just 1%.
• Maintain OVERWEIGHT on dry bulk shipping. We expect this current half year to be very strong for dry bulk shipping for the above reasons. The BDI recently closed at 2,623 points. We expect it to average 4,000 points in 2H09, implying at least 50%upside to the current level and almost double the 1H average of 2,084 points.
• We have OUTPERFORM calls on STXPO, Pacific Basin, PSL and TTA, as valuations remain attractive with upside to the sum-of-parts market value of theirfleets. However, Maybulk remains an UNDERPERFORM on valuation grounds. With the exception of Maybulk, we have raised target prices for all the stocks as we factor in the recovery of second-hand vessel values.
Here are 10 reasons.
• Reason 1: Crude steel production in China is expected to rise 8.2% to hit 540m tonnes as the economic stimulus measures take effect.
• Reason 2: China is expected to continue relying on imported iron ore for the majority of its consumption because the current price premium of imported iron ore over domestic sources is not excessive given the higher quality.
• Reason 3: China’s iron ore inventories at ports are low relative to its increased consumption of imported ore, despite testing previous highs on an absolute basis.
• Reason 4: Brazilian iron ore exports may take off in 2H09 and increase tonne mile demand. With Australian production already at close to full capacity, any further increase in global iron ore demand could draw additional shipments from Brazil and increase tonne-mile demand, thereby boosting dry bulk shipping rates.
• Reason 5: Europe, Russia, Japan and the US will restart blast furnaces as apparent steel demand is higher than the current level of production.
• Reason 6: Growth of property starts in China has finally gone into positive territory, suggesting that demand for construction steel is set to expand.
• Reason 7: China’s demand for and production of flat steel products should also be boosted by continuing expansion of automobile sales and the recent positive trend observed for sales of white goods.
• Reason 8: Steel inventories have declined across the globe while steel prices are rising. These are powerful incentives for steel mills to restart production.
• Reason 9: China and Japan may see higher coal imports in 2H since Chinese electricity production growth is back in the black while Japan’s coal imports should start to recover with the expected expansion of industrial production in 2H.
• Reason 10: The idle fleet of bulkers currently stands at just 5% of the total fleet,with the vast majority being ships more than 20 years old. This means that the idle fleet of modern tonnage is just 1%.
• Maintain OVERWEIGHT on dry bulk shipping. We expect this current half year to be very strong for dry bulk shipping for the above reasons. The BDI recently closed at 2,623 points. We expect it to average 4,000 points in 2H09, implying at least 50%upside to the current level and almost double the 1H average of 2,084 points.
• We have OUTPERFORM calls on STXPO, Pacific Basin, PSL and TTA, as valuations remain attractive with upside to the sum-of-parts market value of theirfleets. However, Maybulk remains an UNDERPERFORM on valuation grounds. With the exception of Maybulk, we have raised target prices for all the stocks as we factor in the recovery of second-hand vessel values.
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Obama rejects 2nd stimulus: Give recovery time
President Barack Obama on Saturday dismissed the idea the nation might need a second stimulus to jolt the economy out of recession and urged Americans to be patient with his economic recovery plan.
Faced with rising unemployment numbers and criticism from Republicans who have already labeled the $787 billion stimulus a failure, Obama used his weekly radio and Internet address to remind voters that reversing job losses takes time.
He criticized Republicans for opposing the stimulus but offering few alternatives to the worst recession since the Great Depression. And he rejected talk of a second stimulus, an idea that has been discussed by Democrats and even famed investor Warren Buffett.
"We must let it work the way it's supposed to, with the understanding that in any recession, unemployment tends to recover more slowly than other measures of economic activity," Obama, who is visiting Ghana on Saturday, said in his recorded message.
The stimulus included $288 billion in tax cuts, dramatic increases in Medicaid spending, about $48 billion in highway and bridge construction and billions more to boost energy efficiency, shore up state budgets and improve schools.
The plan "was not designed to work in four months," Obama said. "It was designed to work over two years."
Since Obama signed the stimulus into law, the economy has lost more than 2 million jobs and the unemployment rate has climbed higher than the White House predicted it would have ever reached without the stimulus.
Some companies say stimulus money helped avoid layoffs. Independent government auditors found that stimulus aid to states helped keep teachers off unemployment lines. But overall job numbers continue to suffer.
Republicans have seized on this opportunity to criticize the president, but they have struggled to find their collective voice. At a news conference Friday, Republican lawmakers criticized the White House for spending so much, while simultaneously saying the administration wasn't spending it fast enough.
With the Obama administration now pushing for a costly overhaul of the nation's health care system, Republicans are casting Democrats as liberals on a shopping spree. In the GOP's weekly address Saturday, Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, the House Republican whip, accused the Democratic-controlled Congress of reckless spending and careless borrowing.
Though the Republican stimulus proposal this January had its own deficit-pushing price tag of $478 billion, Cantor and Republicans are trying to make their case against Obama as one of fiscal restraint.
"For the stimulus alone, Washington borrowed nearly $10,000 from every American household," Cantor said. "Let me ask you: Do you feel $10,000 richer today?"
In his speech, Obama twice referred to "cleaning up the wreckage" of a recession that began on President George W. Bush's watch. But with Obama's poll numbers slipping on economic issues, Republicans want to lay the economy at the president's feet.
Faced with rising unemployment numbers and criticism from Republicans who have already labeled the $787 billion stimulus a failure, Obama used his weekly radio and Internet address to remind voters that reversing job losses takes time.
He criticized Republicans for opposing the stimulus but offering few alternatives to the worst recession since the Great Depression. And he rejected talk of a second stimulus, an idea that has been discussed by Democrats and even famed investor Warren Buffett.
"We must let it work the way it's supposed to, with the understanding that in any recession, unemployment tends to recover more slowly than other measures of economic activity," Obama, who is visiting Ghana on Saturday, said in his recorded message.
The stimulus included $288 billion in tax cuts, dramatic increases in Medicaid spending, about $48 billion in highway and bridge construction and billions more to boost energy efficiency, shore up state budgets and improve schools.
The plan "was not designed to work in four months," Obama said. "It was designed to work over two years."
Since Obama signed the stimulus into law, the economy has lost more than 2 million jobs and the unemployment rate has climbed higher than the White House predicted it would have ever reached without the stimulus.
Some companies say stimulus money helped avoid layoffs. Independent government auditors found that stimulus aid to states helped keep teachers off unemployment lines. But overall job numbers continue to suffer.
Republicans have seized on this opportunity to criticize the president, but they have struggled to find their collective voice. At a news conference Friday, Republican lawmakers criticized the White House for spending so much, while simultaneously saying the administration wasn't spending it fast enough.
With the Obama administration now pushing for a costly overhaul of the nation's health care system, Republicans are casting Democrats as liberals on a shopping spree. In the GOP's weekly address Saturday, Virginia Rep. Eric Cantor, the House Republican whip, accused the Democratic-controlled Congress of reckless spending and careless borrowing.
Though the Republican stimulus proposal this January had its own deficit-pushing price tag of $478 billion, Cantor and Republicans are trying to make their case against Obama as one of fiscal restraint.
"For the stimulus alone, Washington borrowed nearly $10,000 from every American household," Cantor said. "Let me ask you: Do you feel $10,000 richer today?"
In his speech, Obama twice referred to "cleaning up the wreckage" of a recession that began on President George W. Bush's watch. But with Obama's poll numbers slipping on economic issues, Republicans want to lay the economy at the president's feet.
Warren Buffett says second stimulus might be needed
Legendary investor Warren Buffett said in an interview aired Thursday that unemployment could hit 11% and a second stimulus package might be needed as the economy struggles to recover from recession.
Buffett, the billionaire founder of Berkshire Hathaway, said Americans suffered "a shock to the system" from the economic difficulties in the final quarter of last year but had started to rebound.
"We're not in a freefall, but we're not in a recovery either," he told ABC's Good Morning America.
"We were in a freefall really in the last quarter of last year, starting in the financial markets and spreading to the economy, and we had this huge change in behavior."
Buffett, a supporter of President Obama during last year's election campaign, said a second economic stimulus package might be needed. The Obama administration says it does not see a need for a second stimulus yet.
"I think a second one may well be called for. It is not a panacea. A stimulus is the right thing. You hope it doesn't get watered down," he said.
He likened the first $787 billion stimulus package passed by Congress to "half a tablet of Viagra and then having also a bunch of candy mixed in — it doesn't have really quite the wallop."
Buffett said unemployment had "a ways to go" and he would not be surprised to see it hit 11% before it recovers.
"I'm not predicting it but no that would not surprise me," he said of the 11% figure.
"We're going to come out of this better than ever, the best days of America lie ahead but not next week or next month," he said.
Buffett, the billionaire founder of Berkshire Hathaway, said Americans suffered "a shock to the system" from the economic difficulties in the final quarter of last year but had started to rebound.
"We're not in a freefall, but we're not in a recovery either," he told ABC's Good Morning America.
"We were in a freefall really in the last quarter of last year, starting in the financial markets and spreading to the economy, and we had this huge change in behavior."
Buffett, a supporter of President Obama during last year's election campaign, said a second economic stimulus package might be needed. The Obama administration says it does not see a need for a second stimulus yet.
"I think a second one may well be called for. It is not a panacea. A stimulus is the right thing. You hope it doesn't get watered down," he said.
He likened the first $787 billion stimulus package passed by Congress to "half a tablet of Viagra and then having also a bunch of candy mixed in — it doesn't have really quite the wallop."
Buffett said unemployment had "a ways to go" and he would not be surprised to see it hit 11% before it recovers.
"I'm not predicting it but no that would not surprise me," he said of the 11% figure.
"We're going to come out of this better than ever, the best days of America lie ahead but not next week or next month," he said.
Saturday, February 7, 2009
A positive mind to ace the big 'C'
Looking at how healthy he is now, it is hard to imagine that in 1997, Yap (above) was given only three months to live.
He credits the love and support of his wife and five children as his reason to fight the disease, when all he wanted to do was die.
It started with stomach pains 12 years ago, after eating some yee sang (a dish of shredded vegetables and raw fish). At the hospital, the doctor presumed that he had food poisoning and discharged him after treatment.
"I felt the pain off and on, and I had no appetite. Then I had spicy food at a mamak stall one day," he said. "The pain was so excruciating, I was admitted to hospital.
"The doctors conducted a battery of tests, including an X-ray and MRI. After a colonoscopy, they found a tumour bigger than my fist.
"I had advanced stage three colon cancer."
Yap went under the knife to have the tumour and 38cm of his colon removed. He also underwent six cycles of chemotherapy but his ordeal did not end there. Two months after he completed chemo, Yap noticed lumps on his neck.
"I had a relapse. The cancer had moved to my lymph nodes and the tumours were like two horns on my neck. The doctors suggested new drugs to treat this stage-four growth and said that if I did not go for treatment, I would have just three months to live!"
Yap abhorred any treatment as he had seen the effect of the drugs on another cancer patient.
"It was not something I wanted to go through if I was dying. I cried until I had no tears left.
"I didn't want my wife and children to find out that I was dying. I wanted to spare them the pain."
Eventually, he did tell them and it was an emotional moment when his family told him that they would make the best of the time they had with him. That was when Yap decided to find ways to prolong his life.
With his wife's encouragement, he took up qiqong.
"I practised 10 to 12 hours a day using the zhineng technique to overcome pain. I did a 3 1/2-hour session daily."
Yap claimed that qigong had helped him overcome cancer as within days of the gruelling exercises, he could no longer feel the lumps on his neck.
To motivate other cancer patients, he teaches qigong at National Cancer Society Malaysia (NCSM) every Sunday.
"What I do through qigong is suppress the cancer cells in my body. I am a much stronger person now. I have not seen my doctors since 1997."
Yap said a person is diagnosed with cancer for life as it is incurable. To ensure that you do not relapse, it is important to change your lifestyle and stay positive.
Attitude is a crucial factor in keeping cancer at bay, because if the mind is weak, it will be difficult to win the battle.
"If you have cancer, talk to cancer survivors. Don't talk to people who have no idea of what you are going through. You need to join a support group.
"Family and friends need to be positive around cancer patients. They should not cry or start to ask about dying or show a negative attitude because it will affect the patient."
He credits the love and support of his wife and five children as his reason to fight the disease, when all he wanted to do was die.
It started with stomach pains 12 years ago, after eating some yee sang (a dish of shredded vegetables and raw fish). At the hospital, the doctor presumed that he had food poisoning and discharged him after treatment.
"I felt the pain off and on, and I had no appetite. Then I had spicy food at a mamak stall one day," he said. "The pain was so excruciating, I was admitted to hospital.
"The doctors conducted a battery of tests, including an X-ray and MRI. After a colonoscopy, they found a tumour bigger than my fist.
"I had advanced stage three colon cancer."
Yap went under the knife to have the tumour and 38cm of his colon removed. He also underwent six cycles of chemotherapy but his ordeal did not end there. Two months after he completed chemo, Yap noticed lumps on his neck.
"I had a relapse. The cancer had moved to my lymph nodes and the tumours were like two horns on my neck. The doctors suggested new drugs to treat this stage-four growth and said that if I did not go for treatment, I would have just three months to live!"
Yap abhorred any treatment as he had seen the effect of the drugs on another cancer patient.
"It was not something I wanted to go through if I was dying. I cried until I had no tears left.
"I didn't want my wife and children to find out that I was dying. I wanted to spare them the pain."
Eventually, he did tell them and it was an emotional moment when his family told him that they would make the best of the time they had with him. That was when Yap decided to find ways to prolong his life.
With his wife's encouragement, he took up qiqong.
"I practised 10 to 12 hours a day using the zhineng technique to overcome pain. I did a 3 1/2-hour session daily."
Yap claimed that qigong had helped him overcome cancer as within days of the gruelling exercises, he could no longer feel the lumps on his neck.
To motivate other cancer patients, he teaches qigong at National Cancer Society Malaysia (NCSM) every Sunday.
"What I do through qigong is suppress the cancer cells in my body. I am a much stronger person now. I have not seen my doctors since 1997."
Yap said a person is diagnosed with cancer for life as it is incurable. To ensure that you do not relapse, it is important to change your lifestyle and stay positive.
Attitude is a crucial factor in keeping cancer at bay, because if the mind is weak, it will be difficult to win the battle.
"If you have cancer, talk to cancer survivors. Don't talk to people who have no idea of what you are going through. You need to join a support group.
"Family and friends need to be positive around cancer patients. They should not cry or start to ask about dying or show a negative attitude because it will affect the patient."
Monday, January 12, 2009
一个美丽愿景的隐忧
2005年，旅游局宣布了一个十年的发展宏图,要在2015年，吸引1700万人次的旅客到来。这比2005年的800万旅客到访人次多一倍。该局也计划将旅游收益在十年内增加两倍，由2005年的108亿元增至300亿元。
因为这个美丽的愿景，许多人开始相信，新加坡将面对严重的酒店短缺问题。
上至政府高官，下至商界人士都说：新加坡在2005年拥有的3万5000间酒店客房，只够应付当时的800万名旅客的需求。一旦旅客人数增加至1700万，新加坡将需要多3万5000间酒店客房，因此，新加坡有必要在未来几年内大幅度提高酒店客房的供应量。
由于酒店客房收费自2005年起便以惊人的速度飙涨，乌节路的五星级酒店从每晚150元的价钱，一路攀升至每晚300元至400元，在一些大型会议或活动举行期间，甚至高达每晚500元至600元，令商界大喊吃不消。因此政府在过去两三年更是毫不留情地将新酒店地段一幅接一幅地发放到市场。
2006年，政府将25幅酒店地段开放让发展商选购，其中10幅地段以24亿元的总价值成交。另外还有17家酒店私下成交，总成交金额超过15亿元。
2007年，政府再接再励，卖出多10幅可建酒店的地段，总成交额达到37亿元，另外还有11家酒店私下成交，总成交额超过10亿元。
2008年的大型房地产交易放缓下来，不过政府仍然卖出了两幅酒店地段，另外还有一幅位于马里士他路的酒店地段以3980万元私下成交。
这造成新加坡的新酒店客房供应量从去年开始“大涨潮”，其增长的速度之快是过去十年来前所未见的。从2008年至2012年，新加坡将有1万4000多间酒店客房完工，即平均每年2854间。但是，从1998年至2007年的十年之内，新加坡每年只有平均494间客房完工。
过去几年内，不是没有人对这种酒店客房飞快增长的速度感到担忧。2006年7月，笔者曾写过一篇评论“又一个旅游愿景”，对政府频频放发酒店地段的速度表示关注。
旅游局设定目标也有失准
1700万旅客到访人次是一个令人向往的愿景，所有新加坡人都希望看到它实现。不过，希望是一回事，认定它一定会实现又是另一回事。
旅游局在这些年来设定的目标，达到的虽然不少，失准的也不是没有。1996年，旅游局也曾推出一个“旅游都会21世纪愿景”，目标是在五年后的2000年，争取1000万人次的旅客到访，并赚取160亿元外汇。
结果，2000年的旅客到访人数只微升到770万人次，收益则不升反降，只达到101亿元。这主要是因为区域在1997年发生了亚洲金融风暴，各行各业都受到冲击，旅游业也无法幸免。
1998年到访人数甚至由1995年的710万人次下降至620万人次的低点，旅客收益也由1995年的116亿元减少至85亿元。因此，这个1000万旅客人次的目标一直到2007年，也就是设定的11年后才第一次达到，为1030万。
旅游局原本将2008年旅客到访人次的目标“瞄准”在1080万，旅客收益在155亿元，不过，去年9月它已经宣布这个目标已无望达到。
截至去年11月，到访新加坡的旅客人次只有919万。这也就是说，上个月的旅客到访人次必须超过81万才能在2008年连续第二年守住1000万人次的大关。
设定目标是重要的，特别是为了宏观的经济策划。但是，根据一个假设来做出更多的假设，并且全力去实行，却是相当危险的。
虽然大家都认为，新加坡将在两座IR、F1赛事、青奥会，以及乌节路几个重头项目的带动下，形势一片大好。但在短短五年内就将整个市场的酒店客房供应量增加40％，即使是在平稳的经济环境下，仍是一个大胆的举动。更何况，这许多的假设似乎没有将新加坡每隔五六年就出现一次的经济不景气考虑在内。
当然，新加坡未必已没有机会在2015年达到1700万旅客到访人次的目标，因为现在距离2015年还有六年。如果全球经济在一两年内翻身，迅速奋起直追，说不定我们还是有机会赶上这个目标。但问题是，在未来一两年的关键期，大批新酒店客房将涌入市场，这是不是会对一些业者带来致命的伤害，因失血过多而阵亡？
即使新加坡的旅客到访人数真的达到1700万，我们又是否应该认真思考，新加坡是否真的需要另外3万5000间客房？在这1700万旅客到访人次中，有多少属于过境旅客，根本不会入住本地的酒店？他们当中又会不会有人像一些入境澳门的旅客一样，在赌场通宵狂赌，连住宿酒店的钱都省下来？
因为这个美丽的愿景，许多人开始相信，新加坡将面对严重的酒店短缺问题。
上至政府高官，下至商界人士都说：新加坡在2005年拥有的3万5000间酒店客房，只够应付当时的800万名旅客的需求。一旦旅客人数增加至1700万，新加坡将需要多3万5000间酒店客房，因此，新加坡有必要在未来几年内大幅度提高酒店客房的供应量。
由于酒店客房收费自2005年起便以惊人的速度飙涨，乌节路的五星级酒店从每晚150元的价钱，一路攀升至每晚300元至400元，在一些大型会议或活动举行期间，甚至高达每晚500元至600元，令商界大喊吃不消。因此政府在过去两三年更是毫不留情地将新酒店地段一幅接一幅地发放到市场。
2006年，政府将25幅酒店地段开放让发展商选购，其中10幅地段以24亿元的总价值成交。另外还有17家酒店私下成交，总成交金额超过15亿元。
2007年，政府再接再励，卖出多10幅可建酒店的地段，总成交额达到37亿元，另外还有11家酒店私下成交，总成交额超过10亿元。
2008年的大型房地产交易放缓下来，不过政府仍然卖出了两幅酒店地段，另外还有一幅位于马里士他路的酒店地段以3980万元私下成交。
这造成新加坡的新酒店客房供应量从去年开始“大涨潮”，其增长的速度之快是过去十年来前所未见的。从2008年至2012年，新加坡将有1万4000多间酒店客房完工，即平均每年2854间。但是，从1998年至2007年的十年之内，新加坡每年只有平均494间客房完工。
过去几年内，不是没有人对这种酒店客房飞快增长的速度感到担忧。2006年7月，笔者曾写过一篇评论“又一个旅游愿景”，对政府频频放发酒店地段的速度表示关注。
旅游局设定目标也有失准
1700万旅客到访人次是一个令人向往的愿景，所有新加坡人都希望看到它实现。不过，希望是一回事，认定它一定会实现又是另一回事。
旅游局在这些年来设定的目标，达到的虽然不少，失准的也不是没有。1996年，旅游局也曾推出一个“旅游都会21世纪愿景”，目标是在五年后的2000年，争取1000万人次的旅客到访，并赚取160亿元外汇。
结果，2000年的旅客到访人数只微升到770万人次，收益则不升反降，只达到101亿元。这主要是因为区域在1997年发生了亚洲金融风暴，各行各业都受到冲击，旅游业也无法幸免。
1998年到访人数甚至由1995年的710万人次下降至620万人次的低点，旅客收益也由1995年的116亿元减少至85亿元。因此，这个1000万旅客人次的目标一直到2007年，也就是设定的11年后才第一次达到，为1030万。
旅游局原本将2008年旅客到访人次的目标“瞄准”在1080万，旅客收益在155亿元，不过，去年9月它已经宣布这个目标已无望达到。
截至去年11月，到访新加坡的旅客人次只有919万。这也就是说，上个月的旅客到访人次必须超过81万才能在2008年连续第二年守住1000万人次的大关。
设定目标是重要的，特别是为了宏观的经济策划。但是，根据一个假设来做出更多的假设，并且全力去实行，却是相当危险的。
虽然大家都认为，新加坡将在两座IR、F1赛事、青奥会，以及乌节路几个重头项目的带动下，形势一片大好。但在短短五年内就将整个市场的酒店客房供应量增加40％，即使是在平稳的经济环境下，仍是一个大胆的举动。更何况，这许多的假设似乎没有将新加坡每隔五六年就出现一次的经济不景气考虑在内。
当然，新加坡未必已没有机会在2015年达到1700万旅客到访人次的目标，因为现在距离2015年还有六年。如果全球经济在一两年内翻身，迅速奋起直追，说不定我们还是有机会赶上这个目标。但问题是，在未来一两年的关键期，大批新酒店客房将涌入市场，这是不是会对一些业者带来致命的伤害，因失血过多而阵亡？
即使新加坡的旅客到访人数真的达到1700万，我们又是否应该认真思考，新加坡是否真的需要另外3万5000间客房？在这1700万旅客到访人次中，有多少属于过境旅客，根本不会入住本地的酒店？他们当中又会不会有人像一些入境澳门的旅客一样，在赌场通宵狂赌，连住宿酒店的钱都省下来？
外资抛售中资银行股不足惧
近日，外资战略投资者纷纷出售到期解禁的中资银行股股权，套现其增值不少的中国各银行H股股份。美国银行以28亿美元出售持有的中国建设银行2.5%股份，获利11亿美元；瑞银集团以8.35亿美元出售了其在中国银行1.33%的持股，实现近3.35亿美元的利润，李嘉诚也通过出售其慈善基金持有的部分中国银行股票，套现近5亿美元，英国苏格兰皇家银行等机构也在协商出售其持有的股票。这是自2005年以来外资金融机构共向中国的银行投资250多亿美元中的一小部分，但在解禁后集中抛售并引起中资银行股股价纷纷大幅下跌，备受关注。
在全球金融市场出现危机而导致大部分机构和投资都出现亏损的背景下，金融机构出售流动性强且比较优质的资产以修复因全球金融危机而恶化的资产状况，是一项正常的选择。而所持到期的中资银行股正是这样的可售出资产，通过折价配售不仅购买者踊跃，而且兑现了巨额利润，获得宝贵的现金。促使外资机构离场的另外一个原因是，部分机构(如瑞银)对中国银行股未来前景较为悲观。尽管中资银行股价较为合理，但随着经济衰退，大量企业倒闭可能导致存量信贷业务增加不良资产率，而刺激性的拯救方案也会导致政府部门要求更为激进信贷政策，即给那些缺乏抵押或者前景不妙的项目和公司提供融资。不过，目前来看，外资抛售的主要原因还是以改善自身资产状况为主。
当初中国引进境外战略投资者的主要原因是，提高改制后的中资银行的投资吸引力来增强投资者的信心，实现顺利上市，并借助外资股东来提升银行的营运质素与内部管理，提高风险管理和产品创新水平。目前来看，这些所谓的战略投资者更像是财务投资者，这也可能是时机造成的印象，金融危机促使他们撤离。
但是，必须指出的是，大型商业银行并不具备依靠外部股东来改善治理的可能，因为大型商业银行必然以“我”为主，外资股东影响力较弱；其次，双方在国内外市场越来越具有竞争性。相反，外资入股的中小商业银行并没有遭受抛售(这也可能因为禁售期与上市地点的因素)，荷兰银行还增持了在北京银行的股份，因为外资机构在中小银行具有更大的话语权并以此积累更多中国市场经验。因此说，大型商业银行应该以大规模引进海外金融人才以及减少行政部门对银行商业运作的干预来改善治理，而不是依靠所谓的战略投资者。
战略投资者成功协议出售表明，国际投资者对中国银行股仍具信心。但是，目前仍不清楚接手人都有谁。如果说原始配售是为了上市引进战略投资者，那么，美国银行在去年5月、11月两次从汇金公司手中低价购买250多亿股建行H股股份，在2个月后，却又以出于自身财务状况等因素，减持56.2亿股建行股份图利不菲。
目前，淡马锡控股、亚洲开发银行和三菱东京UFJ银行等所持有的中国银行股权已于2008年12月31日解禁；工商银行战略投资者包括高盛和安联，其禁售期也将于今年4月份期满。未来这些投资者是否会陆续减持令人关注，这将直接影响中国资本市场的走势，也意味着一场盛宴的结束。
在全球金融市场出现危机而导致大部分机构和投资都出现亏损的背景下，金融机构出售流动性强且比较优质的资产以修复因全球金融危机而恶化的资产状况，是一项正常的选择。而所持到期的中资银行股正是这样的可售出资产，通过折价配售不仅购买者踊跃，而且兑现了巨额利润，获得宝贵的现金。促使外资机构离场的另外一个原因是，部分机构(如瑞银)对中国银行股未来前景较为悲观。尽管中资银行股价较为合理，但随着经济衰退，大量企业倒闭可能导致存量信贷业务增加不良资产率，而刺激性的拯救方案也会导致政府部门要求更为激进信贷政策，即给那些缺乏抵押或者前景不妙的项目和公司提供融资。不过，目前来看，外资抛售的主要原因还是以改善自身资产状况为主。
当初中国引进境外战略投资者的主要原因是，提高改制后的中资银行的投资吸引力来增强投资者的信心，实现顺利上市，并借助外资股东来提升银行的营运质素与内部管理，提高风险管理和产品创新水平。目前来看，这些所谓的战略投资者更像是财务投资者，这也可能是时机造成的印象，金融危机促使他们撤离。
但是，必须指出的是，大型商业银行并不具备依靠外部股东来改善治理的可能，因为大型商业银行必然以“我”为主，外资股东影响力较弱；其次，双方在国内外市场越来越具有竞争性。相反，外资入股的中小商业银行并没有遭受抛售(这也可能因为禁售期与上市地点的因素)，荷兰银行还增持了在北京银行的股份，因为外资机构在中小银行具有更大的话语权并以此积累更多中国市场经验。因此说，大型商业银行应该以大规模引进海外金融人才以及减少行政部门对银行商业运作的干预来改善治理，而不是依靠所谓的战略投资者。
战略投资者成功协议出售表明，国际投资者对中国银行股仍具信心。但是，目前仍不清楚接手人都有谁。如果说原始配售是为了上市引进战略投资者，那么，美国银行在去年5月、11月两次从汇金公司手中低价购买250多亿股建行H股股份，在2个月后，却又以出于自身财务状况等因素，减持56.2亿股建行股份图利不菲。
目前，淡马锡控股、亚洲开发银行和三菱东京UFJ银行等所持有的中国银行股权已于2008年12月31日解禁；工商银行战略投资者包括高盛和安联，其禁售期也将于今年4月份期满。未来这些投资者是否会陆续减持令人关注，这将直接影响中国资本市场的走势，也意味着一场盛宴的结束。
Saturday, November 15, 2008
买促销或便宜机票新管道 CAAS网站让消费者“货比三家”
新加坡民航局（CAAS）设立新服务网站，为本地消费者提供另一个购买促销或便宜机票的管道，也希望吸引更多过境新加坡的外国旅客逗留和观光。
这个全新网站名为ViaSingapore.com，公众可通过该网站查询往返新加坡的客机机票价格，在“货比三家”后也能立即在网上订购主要航空公司或廉价航空公司的机票。
民航局昨天发文告说，ViaSingapore的搜索引擎具备搜索超过100个网站的实时资料功能，可以根据用户所处的国家和所提出的要求为他们搜寻价格最低廉的飞机票。此外，该网站也借助樟宜机场与区域的广泛连通性（connectivity），让网站用户从中获取旅游资料，并以新加坡作为旅游起点或到亚太其他区域游玩。
民航局局长林金春说：“这个网站将为旅游者提供一站式服务，能让他们以最理想的飞机票价来新加坡旅游或探索亚太其他区域。民航局积极提升新加坡樟宜机场作为航空枢纽的魅力，这个网站的设立是民航局在这方面所作的其中努力。”
ViaSingapore.com的搜索引擎具备搜索超过100个网站的实时资料功能，可以根据用户所处的国家和所提出的要求为他们搜寻价格最低廉的飞机票。
文告说，ViaSingapore.com所推出的特价促销，将会是这个网站独有的。除了能搜寻价格具有吸引力的机票，用户可以通过这个网站寻找合意的旅游配套和酒店住宿等资料。外国旅客也能从中获知有关新加坡好去处和最新的活动消息，并且提供本地各个旅游景点的观光游配套，吸引过境的外国旅客在本地逗留。
为了配合ViaSingapore网站的正式启用，本地廉价航空公司捷星亚洲（Jetstar Asia）在网站上推出飞往曼谷的90元单程机票（包括燃油附加费和其他税务费），供顾客订购，促销日期从本月14日到19日。
这个全新网站名为ViaSingapore.com，公众可通过该网站查询往返新加坡的客机机票价格，在“货比三家”后也能立即在网上订购主要航空公司或廉价航空公司的机票。
民航局昨天发文告说，ViaSingapore的搜索引擎具备搜索超过100个网站的实时资料功能，可以根据用户所处的国家和所提出的要求为他们搜寻价格最低廉的飞机票。此外，该网站也借助樟宜机场与区域的广泛连通性（connectivity），让网站用户从中获取旅游资料，并以新加坡作为旅游起点或到亚太其他区域游玩。
民航局局长林金春说：“这个网站将为旅游者提供一站式服务，能让他们以最理想的飞机票价来新加坡旅游或探索亚太其他区域。民航局积极提升新加坡樟宜机场作为航空枢纽的魅力，这个网站的设立是民航局在这方面所作的其中努力。”
ViaSingapore.com的搜索引擎具备搜索超过100个网站的实时资料功能，可以根据用户所处的国家和所提出的要求为他们搜寻价格最低廉的飞机票。
文告说，ViaSingapore.com所推出的特价促销，将会是这个网站独有的。除了能搜寻价格具有吸引力的机票，用户可以通过这个网站寻找合意的旅游配套和酒店住宿等资料。外国旅客也能从中获知有关新加坡好去处和最新的活动消息，并且提供本地各个旅游景点的观光游配套，吸引过境的外国旅客在本地逗留。
为了配合ViaSingapore网站的正式启用，本地廉价航空公司捷星亚洲（Jetstar Asia）在网站上推出飞往曼谷的90元单程机票（包括燃油附加费和其他税务费），供顾客订购，促销日期从本月14日到19日。
Airfares to KL in freefall
THE Singapore-Kuala Lumpur route, monopolised for so long by the national carriers of the two countries which routinely charged return fares in excess of $400, is opening up with some aggressive promotions. Travellers are spoilt for choice.
Malaysia Airlines (MAS) has become the first to throw down the gauntlet, with its 'One Price, All Seats, All Flights' online promotion offering one-way, economy-class fare on its flights from Singapore to Kuala Lumpur for $89 nett.
MAS also dropped its fares for flights from Singapore to Penang, Langkawi, Kota Kinabalu and Kuching, offering similar $89 nett one-way, economy-class fares to these destinations. This represents a reduction of up to 78 per cent of the lowest normal online fares on these routes.
The move comes ahead of the liberalisation of the Singapore-Kuala Lumpur route from Dec 1, and services between Singapore and East Malaysia, which starts next week. Not to be outdone, Tiger Airways has charged into the battle with one-way fares between Singapore and Kuala Lumpur at $29 (RM69), all inclusive. AirAsia and Jetstar Asia have also launched a slew of additional services, beginning next month, between the two major cities. And flights between Singapore and the East Malaysian towns of Kuching and Kota Kinabalu begin next week.
Singapore Airlines (SIA) and SilkAir have launched promotional return fares to Kuala Lumpur at $293 nett, and to Penang at $313 nett. While these may still appear to be on the high side, they are a sharp markdown to what SIA, a premier airline, used to charge in the days when it monopolised the route along with MAS.
Meanwhile, Jetstar Asia's CEO Chong Phit Lian said that her airline had already been cutting fares on the route for several weeks.
'Yes, we have already started cutting fares to KL with everyday low fares,' she informed. 'But next week, we will embark on even more aggressive fare reductions on our website.'
AirAsia has been trying to out-manoeuvre its rivals by scrapping fuel surcharges (a move which will lop off $20 from ticket prices) in an effort to try to lure passengers.
In addition, the budget carriers are also offering several tens of thousands of 'free tickets' during the month of December to commemorate the further liberalisation of routes between Singapore and the Malaysian destinations.
All this comes after Malaysia and Singapore decided to fast-track their air connectivity by liberalising routes between Changi and several Malaysian destinations. This has resulted in a scramble by both legacy carriers and low-cost carriers to launch more flights and compete more aggressively for passengers.
In about three weeks, flights between the Republic and Kuala Lumpur are set to double to 29 daily as AirAsia, SilkAir, Jetstar Asia and Tiger battle it out against incumbents Malaysia Airlines and Singapore Airlines.
Interestingly, the fare battle comes as the global aviation industry - including Asia-Pacific carriers - is wrestling with the impact of a widening global economic slowdown.
In a statement issued yesterday, the Association of Asia-Pacific Airlines (AAPA) noted that passenger and cargo demand had already fallen dramatically in recent months, with expectations of a further deterioration during the first half of 2009.
'Oil prices are likely to remain subdued given continuing weak economic conditions,' AAPA said. 'This should enable carriers to keep fares competitive and help maintain travel demand at a time of diminished consumer confidence.'
Malaysia Airlines (MAS) has become the first to throw down the gauntlet, with its 'One Price, All Seats, All Flights' online promotion offering one-way, economy-class fare on its flights from Singapore to Kuala Lumpur for $89 nett.
MAS also dropped its fares for flights from Singapore to Penang, Langkawi, Kota Kinabalu and Kuching, offering similar $89 nett one-way, economy-class fares to these destinations. This represents a reduction of up to 78 per cent of the lowest normal online fares on these routes.
The move comes ahead of the liberalisation of the Singapore-Kuala Lumpur route from Dec 1, and services between Singapore and East Malaysia, which starts next week. Not to be outdone, Tiger Airways has charged into the battle with one-way fares between Singapore and Kuala Lumpur at $29 (RM69), all inclusive. AirAsia and Jetstar Asia have also launched a slew of additional services, beginning next month, between the two major cities. And flights between Singapore and the East Malaysian towns of Kuching and Kota Kinabalu begin next week.
Singapore Airlines (SIA) and SilkAir have launched promotional return fares to Kuala Lumpur at $293 nett, and to Penang at $313 nett. While these may still appear to be on the high side, they are a sharp markdown to what SIA, a premier airline, used to charge in the days when it monopolised the route along with MAS.
Meanwhile, Jetstar Asia's CEO Chong Phit Lian said that her airline had already been cutting fares on the route for several weeks.
'Yes, we have already started cutting fares to KL with everyday low fares,' she informed. 'But next week, we will embark on even more aggressive fare reductions on our website.'
AirAsia has been trying to out-manoeuvre its rivals by scrapping fuel surcharges (a move which will lop off $20 from ticket prices) in an effort to try to lure passengers.
In addition, the budget carriers are also offering several tens of thousands of 'free tickets' during the month of December to commemorate the further liberalisation of routes between Singapore and the Malaysian destinations.
All this comes after Malaysia and Singapore decided to fast-track their air connectivity by liberalising routes between Changi and several Malaysian destinations. This has resulted in a scramble by both legacy carriers and low-cost carriers to launch more flights and compete more aggressively for passengers.
In about three weeks, flights between the Republic and Kuala Lumpur are set to double to 29 daily as AirAsia, SilkAir, Jetstar Asia and Tiger battle it out against incumbents Malaysia Airlines and Singapore Airlines.
Interestingly, the fare battle comes as the global aviation industry - including Asia-Pacific carriers - is wrestling with the impact of a widening global economic slowdown.
In a statement issued yesterday, the Association of Asia-Pacific Airlines (AAPA) noted that passenger and cargo demand had already fallen dramatically in recent months, with expectations of a further deterioration during the first half of 2009.
'Oil prices are likely to remain subdued given continuing weak economic conditions,' AAPA said. 'This should enable carriers to keep fares competitive and help maintain travel demand at a time of diminished consumer confidence.'
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Murdoch: Aussies ill-prepared
MEDIA magnate Rupert Murdoch said on Sunday that Australians were poorly prepared to live in a global economy and may 'learn the hard way' what it means.
Speaking amid the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s, Mr Murdoch cited the recent fluctuations in the value of the Australian dollar as evidence of Australia vulnerability to world markets.
The rise of China and India as economic superpowers, each with a new, vast and ambitious middle class, posed special challenges for Australia, and the country would need to adapt.
'Over the next 30 years or so, two or three billion people will join this new global middle class,' Mr Murdoch said at the Sydney Opera House. 'The world has never seen this kind of advance before. These are people who have known deprivation.
'These are people who are intent on developing their skills, improving their lives and showing the world what they can do. And they live right in Australia's neighbourhood.'
The Aussie has lost 15 per cent this month as investors unwound carry trades and dumped commodity currencies on expectations that a global recession would hurt demand for natural resources. Australia is a big exporter of commodities.
On Sunday, the Assistant Treasurer Chris Bowen said confidence globally should get a lift once the US presidential election was out of the way on Tuesday, including in the Australian economy.
Australia has announced a set of measures to deal with the financial crisis, including a stimulus package for households and a government guarantee on local bank deposits, to shield them from the credit crisis.
But Mr Murdoch said Australia's '19th century education system' and the poor living conditions of much of its indigenous population were key hurdles to be overcome, Mr Murdoch said, urging the country of his birth to recover its frontier spirit and position itself as a centre of excellence.
'Australia is wedded to the world - mostly for richer, very occasionally for poorer, certainly for better, and only rarely for worse. And I fear that many Australians will learn the hard way what it means to be unprepared for the challenges that a global economy can bring.'
Australians needed to become less dependent on government handouts and the country must remain open to immigration, he said.
Australia must tap on its advantages of an open, democratic and multi-racial society, built on the rule of law.
'To compete well and use our human capital to the best, we will have to draw on these advantages and make our country stronger. That means being less dependent on government, less complacent about our national institutions, more willing to accept radical reform, and more trusting in our creativity and our competence.
The Australian-born media magnate, who now mainly lives in the United States but whose News Corporation still controls a large part of the Australian media, was giving the first of six lectures in a series known as the 'Boyer Lectures'.
Speaking amid the most severe economic downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s, Mr Murdoch cited the recent fluctuations in the value of the Australian dollar as evidence of Australia vulnerability to world markets.
The rise of China and India as economic superpowers, each with a new, vast and ambitious middle class, posed special challenges for Australia, and the country would need to adapt.
'Over the next 30 years or so, two or three billion people will join this new global middle class,' Mr Murdoch said at the Sydney Opera House. 'The world has never seen this kind of advance before. These are people who have known deprivation.
'These are people who are intent on developing their skills, improving their lives and showing the world what they can do. And they live right in Australia's neighbourhood.'
The Aussie has lost 15 per cent this month as investors unwound carry trades and dumped commodity currencies on expectations that a global recession would hurt demand for natural resources. Australia is a big exporter of commodities.
On Sunday, the Assistant Treasurer Chris Bowen said confidence globally should get a lift once the US presidential election was out of the way on Tuesday, including in the Australian economy.
Australia has announced a set of measures to deal with the financial crisis, including a stimulus package for households and a government guarantee on local bank deposits, to shield them from the credit crisis.
But Mr Murdoch said Australia's '19th century education system' and the poor living conditions of much of its indigenous population were key hurdles to be overcome, Mr Murdoch said, urging the country of his birth to recover its frontier spirit and position itself as a centre of excellence.
'Australia is wedded to the world - mostly for richer, very occasionally for poorer, certainly for better, and only rarely for worse. And I fear that many Australians will learn the hard way what it means to be unprepared for the challenges that a global economy can bring.'
Australians needed to become less dependent on government handouts and the country must remain open to immigration, he said.
Australia must tap on its advantages of an open, democratic and multi-racial society, built on the rule of law.
'To compete well and use our human capital to the best, we will have to draw on these advantages and make our country stronger. That means being less dependent on government, less complacent about our national institutions, more willing to accept radical reform, and more trusting in our creativity and our competence.
The Australian-born media magnate, who now mainly lives in the United States but whose News Corporation still controls a large part of the Australian media, was giving the first of six lectures in a series known as the 'Boyer Lectures'.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
宝钢再次下调钢铁价格 调整幅度多在800元/吨
继稍早将10月价格下调后，昨天，国内钢铁价格的风向标——宝钢再次下调钢铁产品价格，钢坯、热轧、冷轧等全面下调，调整幅度多在800元/吨。
下半年以来，我国钢铁价格结束了上半年的一路上涨，宝钢连续下调10月和11月价格无疑使不景气的钢铁市场雪上加霜。
据宝钢下发给宝钢国际各地区公司及专业公司、销售中心的通知显示，经该公司价格委员会研究决定，11月宝钢股份公司钢铁产品价格在10月份价格基础上再次调整。
此次调整涉及钢坯、热轧、冷轧、彩涂等13个大类，下调幅度普遍在700-800元/吨，降幅最大的一个钢坯品种B40下调2500元/吨。
据了解，宝钢之所以下调钢价，根本原因是国内市场需求下降。记者了解到，目前，国内多家钢厂正在通过各种方式减产、停产以应对低迷的市场。其中，武钢预计在9月开始检修部分设备，而宝钢方面表示，目前订单不足，需求不旺。
面对低迷的钢材市场，宝钢集团董事长徐乐江坦言，在通胀压力、经济增长放缓和下游行业需求减弱的宏观背景下，钢铁行业盈利的潜在风险和困难明显增加。他表示，自2002年开始的一轮钢铁业快速增长周期的拐点已经出现，中国钢铁业将告别过去几年运行的旧模式——靠需求旺盛、产品价格上涨、大家都赚钱的发展模式。中国钢铁行业正在步入高成本时代，依靠低成本、拼价格的竞争方式走到了尽头。中国钢铁产业必须加快兼并重组、加速产业结构升级来应对全球经济的波动和衰退。
下半年以来，我国钢铁价格结束了上半年的一路上涨，宝钢连续下调10月和11月价格无疑使不景气的钢铁市场雪上加霜。
据宝钢下发给宝钢国际各地区公司及专业公司、销售中心的通知显示，经该公司价格委员会研究决定，11月宝钢股份公司钢铁产品价格在10月份价格基础上再次调整。
此次调整涉及钢坯、热轧、冷轧、彩涂等13个大类，下调幅度普遍在700-800元/吨，降幅最大的一个钢坯品种B40下调2500元/吨。
据了解，宝钢之所以下调钢价，根本原因是国内市场需求下降。记者了解到，目前，国内多家钢厂正在通过各种方式减产、停产以应对低迷的市场。其中，武钢预计在9月开始检修部分设备，而宝钢方面表示，目前订单不足，需求不旺。
面对低迷的钢材市场，宝钢集团董事长徐乐江坦言，在通胀压力、经济增长放缓和下游行业需求减弱的宏观背景下，钢铁行业盈利的潜在风险和困难明显增加。他表示，自2002年开始的一轮钢铁业快速增长周期的拐点已经出现，中国钢铁业将告别过去几年运行的旧模式——靠需求旺盛、产品价格上涨、大家都赚钱的发展模式。中国钢铁行业正在步入高成本时代，依靠低成本、拼价格的竞争方式走到了尽头。中国钢铁产业必须加快兼并重组、加速产业结构升级来应对全球经济的波动和衰退。
Saturday, June 7, 2008
China banks facing US$7.2 billion in quake-related write-offs
Mainland banks will likely write off 50 bln yuan in loans from borrowers rendered unable to pay due to the earthquake, the South China Morning Post reported, citing Xu Chengfa, deputy general manager of Bank of Communications.
"(The total) could be as much as that amount. But almost all the damaged buildings are in rural areas and this limits banks' exposure; the impact to us will be minimal," the Hong Kong newspaper cited Xu as saying.(1 usd = 6.9 yuan)
"(The total) could be as much as that amount. But almost all the damaged buildings are in rural areas and this limits banks' exposure; the impact to us will be minimal," the Hong Kong newspaper cited Xu as saying.(1 usd = 6.9 yuan)
Sunday, April 13, 2008
楼市定时炸弹几时爆？
因为丰隆集团主席郭令明的一番话，延迟付款计划又成了舆论的焦点。虽然国家发展部长马宝山隔天迅速灭火，浇熄了让计划死灰复燃的任何机会，但是这个实施十年的促销计划未必就此永埋地底。
虽然官方数据显示，今年第一季的私宅价格仍在上升，但最近的成交量显示，一些高档共管公寓的价格其实已经开始走软，跌幅甚至高达20％。
如果美国局势对本地的冲击比想象中大、楼市继续恶化，过去几年以延迟付款计划卖出的房子，难保不会在明后年像“定时炸弹”一样，在市场造成震动。
但最令人不安的问题是，大家至今都还是不清楚，到底有多少“定时炸弹”已埋在地下？
虽然官方数据显示，今年第一季的私宅价格仍在上升，但最近的成交量显示，一些高档共管公寓的价格其实已经开始走软，跌幅甚至高达20％。
如果美国局势对本地的冲击比想象中大、楼市继续恶化，过去几年以延迟付款计划卖出的房子，难保不会在明后年像“定时炸弹”一样，在市场造成震动。
但最令人不安的问题是，大家至今都还是不清楚，到底有多少“定时炸弹”已埋在地下？
Buy and hold ? Not this banker
Swiss banker Wilfried Kofmehl, 43, has spent his entire working life in private banking - and he loves it.
'It's very difficult to be in this business. Clients expect you to be on top of financial news 24/7. But it's a wonderful job,' said Julius Baer's head of private banking in South-east Asia.
When it comes to his personal financial plans, he points to his four key 'pillars', which include compulsory and voluntary savings schemes administered by the Swiss government. In addition, he has investments in properties and other financial instruments such as stocks, unit trusts and bonds.
Instead of relying on a passive buy-and-hold investment strategy, he has become more proactive in his investing approach in the past few years.
Said Mr Kofmehl: 'I was following the old rule for 15 years, that is, keeping one-third in cash, one-
third in financial assets kept in a balanced portfolio and one-third in real estate. But markets are now so unpredictable and life cycles of economies are getting shorter.'
As a result, he makes drastic shifts from one asset class to another whenever he sees opportunities. Currently, he is holding more cash than usual, and fishing for undervalued equities and bonds.
It helps that he is in the business of managing money for high net-worth clients. Bank Julius Baer is part of the Julius Baer Group, a leading Swiss wealth management firm that targets private banking clients with three to five million Swiss francs (S$4.1 million to S$6.8 million) in investible assets.
Q:Are you a spender or a saver?
I'm mixed. I used to be more of a spender. I started to save more money after I turned 30.
As a private banker, I have developed the discipline to think in terms of medium- and long-term horizons. My current focus is on trying to achieve high returns from my investments so that I can spend more.
Q: What financial planning have you done for yourself?
For Swiss nationals, the key pillars are government-mandated investments, employee and employer contributions, life insurance for themselves and their families, and savings plans.
On top of these, I have real estate in Canada and Europe, and other financial instruments. Given current market conditions, I am active but cautious in equities and selective in emerging market bonds. Recently, I bought into a five-year Philippine bank bond that has a yield to maturity of 16 per cent.
I also have some theme-based investments in areas such as infrastructure and agriculture. Last but not least, I make some direct venture-capital investments.
Q: What's your investment philosophy?
I believe in absolute returns, not relative ones. For me, negative performance is not acceptable.
I'm happy with returns of 15 per cent to 20 per cent a year. Because of the earlier rebound in equity markets, I've achieved annual returns of 20-30 per cent over the past three years.
Q: Any other investments?
I invest in property. I have an apartment in Switzerland which was bought in 1989 for less than one million Swiss francs. Property values have risen steadily there but at a single-digit growth rate.
My wife inherited a cottage in Montreal that's more than a century old. Both properties are currently used by the family.
I don't collect wine but love drinking it. Recently, I came across a potential investment in different vineyards in 'old Europe' in, for instance, France and Italy.
The investment sum is set at US$250,000 (S$339,650) with projected annual returns of 40 per cent. I'm considering it.
Q: Moneywise, what were your growing-up years like?
I come from a regular European family. My parents loved to travel. I wasn't born with a silver spoon.
My dad was also in banking but later took up a government city-planning job. Mum was the best homemaker I ever knew. I was the only child, so I was very pampered.
Dad, who was more of a spender, didn't believe in saving money and spent whatever he had on weekend skiing trips and hobbies involving the family.
Q: What has been a bad investment?
During the 1987 big market crash, I invested 30,000 Swiss francs in Japanese equity warrants and lost all of it. I learnt then the importance of diversification.
Q: Your best investment to date?
My wife. Also, in the past few years, the equities market has had some fantastic runs.
Some of my investments have doubled in value. These include some of the smaller Singapore and Hong Kong stocks.
I also made some good long-term investments in hedge funds.
Q: And your home now is... ?
I live in a two-storey, four-bedroom house with a swimming pool. It's in the Tanglin area.
'It's very difficult to be in this business. Clients expect you to be on top of financial news 24/7. But it's a wonderful job,' said Julius Baer's head of private banking in South-east Asia.
When it comes to his personal financial plans, he points to his four key 'pillars', which include compulsory and voluntary savings schemes administered by the Swiss government. In addition, he has investments in properties and other financial instruments such as stocks, unit trusts and bonds.
Instead of relying on a passive buy-and-hold investment strategy, he has become more proactive in his investing approach in the past few years.
Said Mr Kofmehl: 'I was following the old rule for 15 years, that is, keeping one-third in cash, one-
third in financial assets kept in a balanced portfolio and one-third in real estate. But markets are now so unpredictable and life cycles of economies are getting shorter.'
As a result, he makes drastic shifts from one asset class to another whenever he sees opportunities. Currently, he is holding more cash than usual, and fishing for undervalued equities and bonds.
It helps that he is in the business of managing money for high net-worth clients. Bank Julius Baer is part of the Julius Baer Group, a leading Swiss wealth management firm that targets private banking clients with three to five million Swiss francs (S$4.1 million to S$6.8 million) in investible assets.
Q:Are you a spender or a saver?
I'm mixed. I used to be more of a spender. I started to save more money after I turned 30.
As a private banker, I have developed the discipline to think in terms of medium- and long-term horizons. My current focus is on trying to achieve high returns from my investments so that I can spend more.
Q: What financial planning have you done for yourself?
For Swiss nationals, the key pillars are government-mandated investments, employee and employer contributions, life insurance for themselves and their families, and savings plans.
On top of these, I have real estate in Canada and Europe, and other financial instruments. Given current market conditions, I am active but cautious in equities and selective in emerging market bonds. Recently, I bought into a five-year Philippine bank bond that has a yield to maturity of 16 per cent.
I also have some theme-based investments in areas such as infrastructure and agriculture. Last but not least, I make some direct venture-capital investments.
Q: What's your investment philosophy?
I believe in absolute returns, not relative ones. For me, negative performance is not acceptable.
I'm happy with returns of 15 per cent to 20 per cent a year. Because of the earlier rebound in equity markets, I've achieved annual returns of 20-30 per cent over the past three years.
Q: Any other investments?
I invest in property. I have an apartment in Switzerland which was bought in 1989 for less than one million Swiss francs. Property values have risen steadily there but at a single-digit growth rate.
My wife inherited a cottage in Montreal that's more than a century old. Both properties are currently used by the family.
I don't collect wine but love drinking it. Recently, I came across a potential investment in different vineyards in 'old Europe' in, for instance, France and Italy.
The investment sum is set at US$250,000 (S$339,650) with projected annual returns of 40 per cent. I'm considering it.
Q: Moneywise, what were your growing-up years like?
I come from a regular European family. My parents loved to travel. I wasn't born with a silver spoon.
My dad was also in banking but later took up a government city-planning job. Mum was the best homemaker I ever knew. I was the only child, so I was very pampered.
Dad, who was more of a spender, didn't believe in saving money and spent whatever he had on weekend skiing trips and hobbies involving the family.
Q: What has been a bad investment?
During the 1987 big market crash, I invested 30,000 Swiss francs in Japanese equity warrants and lost all of it. I learnt then the importance of diversification.
Q: Your best investment to date?
My wife. Also, in the past few years, the equities market has had some fantastic runs.
Some of my investments have doubled in value. These include some of the smaller Singapore and Hong Kong stocks.
I also made some good long-term investments in hedge funds.
Q: And your home now is... ?
I live in a two-storey, four-bedroom house with a swimming pool. It's in the Tanglin area.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Frosty February For Home Sales
Where Have All The Buyers Gone? URA released yesterday monthly price and sales data of new residential units sold in the month of February which continued to reaffirm our view on the uncertainty in the physical property market, translating to caution on the part of both developers and buyers, leading to overall soft sales of new units by developers, with new sales declining 47% m-o-m from 320 units in January to an anaemic 170 units in February.
Price Levels Generally Maintained. Prices, however, were generally maintained at previous levels for now though given the small volume of sales for the month, this may not be indicative of the overall pricing trend – as developers that have booked good sales in the past year and have improved their balance sheet could have the luxury of maintaining their asking prices for the moment.
Playing The Waiting Game. With the economic uncertainty arising from sub-prime concerns still weighing down sentiment in the property market, leaving both developers and buyers waiting on the sidelines for the near-term, no catalyst is in sight. The developers with more diversified landbanks and stronger balance sheets are at an advantage, as they can play this waiting game for longer – maintaining asking price levels while timing any new launches to cater to the market segment where demand is relatively strongest. Buyers, on the other hand, sensing a potential dip in prices, are also waiting and holding out from committing to any purchases.
With the waiting game likely to be played out for at least another quarter, we maintain our Neutral stance on the Residential Property Sector, since overall economic fundamentals for Singapore remain healthy in the medium-term.
Price Levels Generally Maintained. Prices, however, were generally maintained at previous levels for now though given the small volume of sales for the month, this may not be indicative of the overall pricing trend – as developers that have booked good sales in the past year and have improved their balance sheet could have the luxury of maintaining their asking prices for the moment.
Playing The Waiting Game. With the economic uncertainty arising from sub-prime concerns still weighing down sentiment in the property market, leaving both developers and buyers waiting on the sidelines for the near-term, no catalyst is in sight. The developers with more diversified landbanks and stronger balance sheets are at an advantage, as they can play this waiting game for longer – maintaining asking price levels while timing any new launches to cater to the market segment where demand is relatively strongest. Buyers, on the other hand, sensing a potential dip in prices, are also waiting and holding out from committing to any purchases.
With the waiting game likely to be played out for at least another quarter, we maintain our Neutral stance on the Residential Property Sector, since overall economic fundamentals for Singapore remain healthy in the medium-term.
Sunday, March 16, 2008
Stagflation
Singapore experienced stagflation in the 70s, same period as USA.
Stagflation in the 1970s
The term "stagflation" -- an economic condition of both continuing inflation and stagnant business activity, together with an increasing unemployment rate -- described the new economic malaise. Inflation seemed to feed on itself. People began to expect continuous increases in the price of goods, so they bought more. This increased demand pushed up prices, leading to demands for higher wages, which pushed
prices higher still in a continuing upward spiral. Labor contracts increasingly came to include automatic cost-of-living clauses, and the government began to peg some payments, such as those for Social Security, to the Consumer Price Index, the best-known gauge of inflation. While these practices helped workers and retirees cope
with inflation, they perpetuated inflation. The government's ever-rising need for funds swelled the budget deficit and led to greater government borrowing, which in turn pushed up interest rates and increased costs for businesses and consumers even further. With energy costs and interest rates high, business investment languished
and unemployment rose to uncomfortable levels.
In desperation, President Jimmy Carter (1977-1981) tried to combat economic weakness and unemployment by increasing government spending, and he established voluntary wage and price guidelines to control inflation. Both were largely unsuccessful. A perhaps more successful but less dramatic attack on inflation involved the "deregulation" of numerous industries, including airlines, trucking, and railroads.
These industries had been tightly regulated, with government controlling routes and fares. Support for deregulation continued beyond the Carter administration. In the 1980s, the government relaxed controls on bank interest rates and long-distance telephone service, and in the 1990s it moved to ease regulation of local
telephone service.
But the most important element in the war against inflation was the Federal Reserve Board, which clamped down hard on the money supply beginning in 1979. By refusing to supply all the money an inflation-ravaged economy wanted, the Fed caused interest rates to rise. As a result, consumer spending and business borrowing slowed abruptly. The economy soon fell into a deep recession.
What's more frightening inflation or recession?
The answer, of course, is both. Accelerating prices and a slow- or no-growth economy is a killer combo that's been called "stagflation" since the 1960s.
Folks of a certain age might remember the stagflation which dominated the US economy in the 1970s. It was a gloomy time when energy prices (and gasoline lines) dominated the news; when whole industries slumped at the same time, and when job losses and price hikes seemed to travel in tandem.
Now, some Federal Reserve-watchers are suggesting we're facing it again.
Remarks in the Fed's latest policy statement "just scream stagflation" writes investment blogger Tim Iacono. The word "stagflation" was mentioned some 2,480 times in recent blog postings, according to online monitor Technorati.com.
It's easy to see where the concerns come from. On the recession side, there's the housing slump, the worsening mortgage market, the continued loss of jobs to lower-paid workers in developing countries and -- as Circuit City recently proved with 3,400 pay-related layoffs -- right here at home. Pay raises have been blah for several years running. If you're looking for inflation signs, you need look no further than February's 1.3 percent gain in producer prices and 0.4 percent rise in consumer prices. But you can look at the accelerating price of manufacturing supplies reported by companies across many industries in the Institute for Supply Management. Or just check what you're paying for healthcare, college tuition, gasoline, or that monthly mortgage.
These economic trends are worrisome, though there are some reasons not to fear a recurrence of the 70s. Interest rates are starting much lower, and the Fed's fear of inflation borders on paranoia. Slow wage growth and jobs should hold prices down, too. The 1970s forces that really pushed markets over the top -- an oil embargo and a family's cornering of the silver market -- aren't in evidence now, and even
homeowners who have seen home prices slide recently are still sitting on a lot of equity. The easy-money credit markets could keep consumers bolstering demand. But, things do fall apart in ever-different ways, so it makes sense to position yourself for "all of the above" without going overboard. Here are some pointers:
Don't go overboard. Overboard behaviors include selling all of your stocks, bonds, and your house and putting the money into gold, palladium, art, or any other commodity that doesn't pay dividends or interest or have earnings.
Worry about yourself first. Collectively, consumers do need to continue spending to keep the economy on the move. But it's probably better for your own finances to shirk this responsibility for a while. Reign in spending and start paying off credit card balances and other bills in the biggest chunks possible.
Organize your debts. Stagflation, the last time around, saw interest rates rising to usurious levels. Use the time you have now to lock in decent fixed-rate mortgages, transfer balances to low-rate cards, or use other loan products on the market to keep your debts manageable and stable.
Stay invested and diversified. Stocks may not be great every year, but as long-term places to keep money, they beat bonds, gold, and shoe boxes all to heck. Keep your retirement fund in a mix of stocks, foreign stocks, bonds, and more. Even if bad times come, spreading your money around will moderate the impact.
Keep an inflation kicker. Mining stocks, inflation bonds, real estate investment funds, natural resources mutual funds all have pros and cons, but you'll be happy with any of them if we undergo a period of runaway inflation. Keep a corner of your portfolio reserved for this.
Typically, that's no more than 10 percent.
Invest in yourself. You may not be able to count on your salary going up in tandem with the costs of living. But the right computer, management, or language course could position you for a better (and better-paying) job.
Save money. The worst part of stagflation is that it makes it harder and harder to save any money. The more cash you have to call upon in an emergency, the less desperate or destitute you'll be.
Stagflation in the 1970s
The term "stagflation" -- an economic condition of both continuing inflation and stagnant business activity, together with an increasing unemployment rate -- described the new economic malaise. Inflation seemed to feed on itself. People began to expect continuous increases in the price of goods, so they bought more. This increased demand pushed up prices, leading to demands for higher wages, which pushed
prices higher still in a continuing upward spiral. Labor contracts increasingly came to include automatic cost-of-living clauses, and the government began to peg some payments, such as those for Social Security, to the Consumer Price Index, the best-known gauge of inflation. While these practices helped workers and retirees cope
with inflation, they perpetuated inflation. The government's ever-rising need for funds swelled the budget deficit and led to greater government borrowing, which in turn pushed up interest rates and increased costs for businesses and consumers even further. With energy costs and interest rates high, business investment languished
and unemployment rose to uncomfortable levels.
In desperation, President Jimmy Carter (1977-1981) tried to combat economic weakness and unemployment by increasing government spending, and he established voluntary wage and price guidelines to control inflation. Both were largely unsuccessful. A perhaps more successful but less dramatic attack on inflation involved the "deregulation" of numerous industries, including airlines, trucking, and railroads.
These industries had been tightly regulated, with government controlling routes and fares. Support for deregulation continued beyond the Carter administration. In the 1980s, the government relaxed controls on bank interest rates and long-distance telephone service, and in the 1990s it moved to ease regulation of local
telephone service.
But the most important element in the war against inflation was the Federal Reserve Board, which clamped down hard on the money supply beginning in 1979. By refusing to supply all the money an inflation-ravaged economy wanted, the Fed caused interest rates to rise. As a result, consumer spending and business borrowing slowed abruptly. The economy soon fell into a deep recession.
What's more frightening inflation or recession?
The answer, of course, is both. Accelerating prices and a slow- or no-growth economy is a killer combo that's been called "stagflation" since the 1960s.
Folks of a certain age might remember the stagflation which dominated the US economy in the 1970s. It was a gloomy time when energy prices (and gasoline lines) dominated the news; when whole industries slumped at the same time, and when job losses and price hikes seemed to travel in tandem.
Now, some Federal Reserve-watchers are suggesting we're facing it again.
Remarks in the Fed's latest policy statement "just scream stagflation" writes investment blogger Tim Iacono. The word "stagflation" was mentioned some 2,480 times in recent blog postings, according to online monitor Technorati.com.
It's easy to see where the concerns come from. On the recession side, there's the housing slump, the worsening mortgage market, the continued loss of jobs to lower-paid workers in developing countries and -- as Circuit City recently proved with 3,400 pay-related layoffs -- right here at home. Pay raises have been blah for several years running. If you're looking for inflation signs, you need look no further than February's 1.3 percent gain in producer prices and 0.4 percent rise in consumer prices. But you can look at the accelerating price of manufacturing supplies reported by companies across many industries in the Institute for Supply Management. Or just check what you're paying for healthcare, college tuition, gasoline, or that monthly mortgage.
These economic trends are worrisome, though there are some reasons not to fear a recurrence of the 70s. Interest rates are starting much lower, and the Fed's fear of inflation borders on paranoia. Slow wage growth and jobs should hold prices down, too. The 1970s forces that really pushed markets over the top -- an oil embargo and a family's cornering of the silver market -- aren't in evidence now, and even
homeowners who have seen home prices slide recently are still sitting on a lot of equity. The easy-money credit markets could keep consumers bolstering demand. But, things do fall apart in ever-different ways, so it makes sense to position yourself for "all of the above" without going overboard. Here are some pointers:
Don't go overboard. Overboard behaviors include selling all of your stocks, bonds, and your house and putting the money into gold, palladium, art, or any other commodity that doesn't pay dividends or interest or have earnings.
Worry about yourself first. Collectively, consumers do need to continue spending to keep the economy on the move. But it's probably better for your own finances to shirk this responsibility for a while. Reign in spending and start paying off credit card balances and other bills in the biggest chunks possible.
Organize your debts. Stagflation, the last time around, saw interest rates rising to usurious levels. Use the time you have now to lock in decent fixed-rate mortgages, transfer balances to low-rate cards, or use other loan products on the market to keep your debts manageable and stable.
Stay invested and diversified. Stocks may not be great every year, but as long-term places to keep money, they beat bonds, gold, and shoe boxes all to heck. Keep your retirement fund in a mix of stocks, foreign stocks, bonds, and more. Even if bad times come, spreading your money around will moderate the impact.
Keep an inflation kicker. Mining stocks, inflation bonds, real estate investment funds, natural resources mutual funds all have pros and cons, but you'll be happy with any of them if we undergo a period of runaway inflation. Keep a corner of your portfolio reserved for this.
Typically, that's no more than 10 percent.
Invest in yourself. You may not be able to count on your salary going up in tandem with the costs of living. But the right computer, management, or language course could position you for a better (and better-paying) job.
Save money. The worst part of stagflation is that it makes it harder and harder to save any money. The more cash you have to call upon in an emergency, the less desperate or destitute you'll be.
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
Did Monday mark the bottom of the stock market's correction that began last fall?
Tuesday's explosive rally surely gives ammunition to those who say, "Yes." By rallying more than 400 points, the Dow Jones Industrial Average on Tuesday turned in the biggest percentage gain in over five years.
But this correction has seen explosive rallies before that turned out not to mark the final bottom. So it behooves us to dig deeper.
I turn first to investment newsletter sentiment. A contrarian analysis of that data supports the notion that Monday was the end of the correction, since in recent sessions enough editors have turned bearish -- in effect throwing in the towel.
Consider the latest readings of the Hulbert Stock Newsletter Sentiment Index, which reflects the average recommended stock market exposure among a subset of several dozen short-term market timing newsletters tracked by the Hulbert Financial Digest. At minus 22.5%, the HSNSI is even lower than it was at the beginning of last week, when I had already concluded that the market was close to a bottom.
In fact, the HSNSI is now lower than it has been since October 2005, some two and one-half years ago. This is a big contrast to the sentiment situation that existed at the Jan. 22 market low, when the editor of the average market-timing newsletter wasn't even as bearish as he was during the market's corrections of last summer and fall.
Technical support for the idea that the correction's bottom has been seen comes from the market's diminished trading volume in recent weeks. Bob Brinker, editor of Bob Brinker's Marketimer, the newsletter with one of the best market-timing records over the last two decades, explained why in the March issue of his newsletter, published earlier this month:
"The process of establishing a stock market correction bottom has unfolded in text-book fashion over the past two months. This process involves the establishment of an initial closing low, followed by a short-term rally, followed by testing of the area of the prior established closing low on reduced trading volume ... The correction bottoming process (over the past few weeks) has seen a significant reduction in selling pressure in the vicinity of the Jan. 22 closing low. This is a very important aspect of any successful test."
Yet another perspective, which also supports the notion that a bottom of at least some import has been registered, comes from Richard Russell, editor of Dow Theory Letters. Though Russell is officially bearish on the stock market's primary trend, he has noted in recent weeks a potentially bullish non-confirmation in the refusal of the Dow Jones Transportation Average to join the Dow in breaking its January low.
Writing before the close on Tuesday, Russell wrote that, at Monday's close, "The market was severely oversold. But what interested me was that the market was not only oversold -- but it was severely oversold in the face of a flagrant non-confirmation on the part of the Transports. This unusually bullish combination provided the basis for a violent turnaround. In fact, it could turn out to be more than 'just a turnaround.' Ideally, what I'd like to see now is a 90% day on the upside. If that were to occur, we could be seeing a key reversal -- with the stock market perhaps having discounted the worst that can be seen ahead."
By the close on Tuesday, Russell's wish for a 90% up day apparently was granted: Up volume on the NYSE represented almost precisely 90% of the combined up and down volume on the exchange.
But this correction has seen explosive rallies before that turned out not to mark the final bottom. So it behooves us to dig deeper.
I turn first to investment newsletter sentiment. A contrarian analysis of that data supports the notion that Monday was the end of the correction, since in recent sessions enough editors have turned bearish -- in effect throwing in the towel.
Consider the latest readings of the Hulbert Stock Newsletter Sentiment Index, which reflects the average recommended stock market exposure among a subset of several dozen short-term market timing newsletters tracked by the Hulbert Financial Digest. At minus 22.5%, the HSNSI is even lower than it was at the beginning of last week, when I had already concluded that the market was close to a bottom.
In fact, the HSNSI is now lower than it has been since October 2005, some two and one-half years ago. This is a big contrast to the sentiment situation that existed at the Jan. 22 market low, when the editor of the average market-timing newsletter wasn't even as bearish as he was during the market's corrections of last summer and fall.
Technical support for the idea that the correction's bottom has been seen comes from the market's diminished trading volume in recent weeks. Bob Brinker, editor of Bob Brinker's Marketimer, the newsletter with one of the best market-timing records over the last two decades, explained why in the March issue of his newsletter, published earlier this month:
"The process of establishing a stock market correction bottom has unfolded in text-book fashion over the past two months. This process involves the establishment of an initial closing low, followed by a short-term rally, followed by testing of the area of the prior established closing low on reduced trading volume ... The correction bottoming process (over the past few weeks) has seen a significant reduction in selling pressure in the vicinity of the Jan. 22 closing low. This is a very important aspect of any successful test."
Yet another perspective, which also supports the notion that a bottom of at least some import has been registered, comes from Richard Russell, editor of Dow Theory Letters. Though Russell is officially bearish on the stock market's primary trend, he has noted in recent weeks a potentially bullish non-confirmation in the refusal of the Dow Jones Transportation Average to join the Dow in breaking its January low.
Writing before the close on Tuesday, Russell wrote that, at Monday's close, "The market was severely oversold. But what interested me was that the market was not only oversold -- but it was severely oversold in the face of a flagrant non-confirmation on the part of the Transports. This unusually bullish combination provided the basis for a violent turnaround. In fact, it could turn out to be more than 'just a turnaround.' Ideally, what I'd like to see now is a 90% day on the upside. If that were to occur, we could be seeing a key reversal -- with the stock market perhaps having discounted the worst that can be seen ahead."
By the close on Tuesday, Russell's wish for a 90% up day apparently was granted: Up volume on the NYSE represented almost precisely 90% of the combined up and down volume on the exchange.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
美次贷危机损失可能超过7200亿美元
次贷危机是美国经济进入下降周期的结果而非原因。自2002年以来的经济增长周期消费增长起着核心作用，而消费动力来自于房地产和金融资产升值带来的财富增加。在房地产的繁荣中，以次级债为代表的金融创新是最有力的推动因素，房地产与金融的互动是资产投资收益不断攀升的主要拉动力。次级房贷的扩张增加了对房屋的有效需求，推动了价格上涨和刺激了房屋建设。但是以资产投资收益刺激消费所带来的经济增长超过了美国经济实际的增长潜力，是无法持续的，在以房地产价格为标志的资产价格达到高点以后经济进入下降周期不可避免。随着经济进入下降周期，次债危机随后发生，是本轮经济周期中以房地产刺激经济的必然结果。
目前各金融机构已经公布的损失超过了1000亿美元，我们以美联储与IMF等机构所公布的数据为基础，计算出与次贷相关的风险资产总额约35000亿美元，估计的损失可能超过7200亿美元。目前美股跌幅远低于此前东南亚金融危机与新经济泡沫破裂后的市场跌幅，同时由于对滞涨担忧的加剧，我们认为，美股跌破1月底美联储救市以后形成的平台将是不可避免的。
目前各金融机构已经公布的损失超过了1000亿美元，我们以美联储与IMF等机构所公布的数据为基础，计算出与次贷相关的风险资产总额约35000亿美元，估计的损失可能超过7200亿美元。目前美股跌幅远低于此前东南亚金融危机与新经济泡沫破裂后的市场跌幅，同时由于对滞涨担忧的加剧，我们认为，美股跌破1月底美联储救市以后形成的平台将是不可避免的。
Saturday, March 8, 2008
巴菲特让市场很受伤
巴菲特的衰退论一出，对美国经济尚抱希望的“乐观派”们有些茫然起来
毫无疑问，巴菲特是一个“活着的传奇”，他独特的市场见解和投资哲学被时间证明是投资界的金科玉律。所以当本周一巴菲特在接受美国电视台采访时给美国经济打上“衰退”标签，并表示不再愿为三大债券保险商MBIA、Ambac和FGIC的8000亿美元市政债券提供担保后，对美国经济尚抱有希望的“乐观派”们也不禁有些茫然起来。
我就是这信心动摇者中的一个。原因其实并不在于我是多么忠实的“巴迷”，而是在于巴菲特唱衰对美国经济中长期走向的潜在影响令人担忧。
实际上，巴菲特看空美国经济也并没有抛出令人信服的论据，而仅仅只是表明了一种玄妙的、所谓“常识性”的感觉。
虽然现在正值风声鹤唳，但平心而论，还并没有足够的数据证明美国经济已经或即将步入衰退。2月28日确认后的2007年第四季度美国GDP增长依旧为黯淡的0.6％，但这一个时点的短期数据并不能说明任何趋势问题。读懂美国经济的关键，实际上在于参透其结构特征。众所周知美国GDP中消费占据七成，投资和净出口占比分别为15％和10％左右，比这些比例数字更重要且更不易察觉的核心特征是，消费是中长期增长的稳定主引擎，而投资波动往往是构成短期增长波动的主要原因。结合这个特征品味美国最新经济数据传递出的信息，很难嗅出衰退的味道。因为次贷风波后的2007年第四季度，美国投资的异常波动与经济增长骤然放缓如影随形，而美国长期消费倾向并没有显露出持续萎靡的迹象。
但巴菲特让这一切都有些变味了。投资大师对美国经济的悲观预期，与前期美联储前主席格林斯潘、美国经济研究局主席费尔德斯坦以及各类权威人士的“衰退论”相互映照，给市场信心带来致命打击。这种来自权威的预期对美国经济中长期走向的影响不容忽视。从行为金融学的理论观点来看，美国战后透支消费、超前消费和炫耀性消费中凸显的欲望、张扬和享乐特征，是“美国梦”的经济表现，其深入骨髓的乐观倾向支撑了美国透支式消费的长久维持。从某种意义上讲，美国经济持续增长很大程度上是因为大多数美国人都坚信美国经济将持续增长，并无所畏惧地维系着强势的消费倾向。
巴菲特的论断可能会让美国人真正害怕起来，而预期走弱无疑将削弱美国消费的稳定趋势，从而进一步加大美国经济陷入衰退的风险。而这一点，正是让我害怕，并真正担心起美国经济未来的根本原因。
至于巴菲特唱衰美国经济的原因，以我的智慧显然无法领悟。我只是依稀记得，巴菲特在那个被人津津乐道的2008年致股东信中说过：“要当心那些油嘴滑舌的所谓专家顾问，当你被他们的夸夸其谈骗得头脑发热，就是他们填满自己腰包的时候。”而且我们都知道巴菲特虽然很有钱，但作为商人，他不可能丢掉赚钱的原始本性。
毫无疑问，巴菲特先高调抛出8000亿美元救市计划，再断言衰退并宣布放弃拯救，对市场信心而言就像是一种使人“从天堂到地狱”的双倍打击。
那么如果美国经济真陷入衰退了，巴菲特会获得什么好处吗？一种可能比较肤浅的猜测是，也许此前宣称“未到抄底时机”的巴菲特会因此找到一个合适的抄底时机？而且，就算跌跌不休之中连抄底时机都没有，至少多元化的巴菲特还能继续将投资目光投向璀璨的新兴市场。
不管巴菲特意欲何为，他的唱衰论调无疑会让市场很受伤。
毫无疑问，巴菲特是一个“活着的传奇”，他独特的市场见解和投资哲学被时间证明是投资界的金科玉律。所以当本周一巴菲特在接受美国电视台采访时给美国经济打上“衰退”标签，并表示不再愿为三大债券保险商MBIA、Ambac和FGIC的8000亿美元市政债券提供担保后，对美国经济尚抱有希望的“乐观派”们也不禁有些茫然起来。
我就是这信心动摇者中的一个。原因其实并不在于我是多么忠实的“巴迷”，而是在于巴菲特唱衰对美国经济中长期走向的潜在影响令人担忧。
实际上，巴菲特看空美国经济也并没有抛出令人信服的论据，而仅仅只是表明了一种玄妙的、所谓“常识性”的感觉。
虽然现在正值风声鹤唳，但平心而论，还并没有足够的数据证明美国经济已经或即将步入衰退。2月28日确认后的2007年第四季度美国GDP增长依旧为黯淡的0.6％，但这一个时点的短期数据并不能说明任何趋势问题。读懂美国经济的关键，实际上在于参透其结构特征。众所周知美国GDP中消费占据七成，投资和净出口占比分别为15％和10％左右，比这些比例数字更重要且更不易察觉的核心特征是，消费是中长期增长的稳定主引擎，而投资波动往往是构成短期增长波动的主要原因。结合这个特征品味美国最新经济数据传递出的信息，很难嗅出衰退的味道。因为次贷风波后的2007年第四季度，美国投资的异常波动与经济增长骤然放缓如影随形，而美国长期消费倾向并没有显露出持续萎靡的迹象。
但巴菲特让这一切都有些变味了。投资大师对美国经济的悲观预期，与前期美联储前主席格林斯潘、美国经济研究局主席费尔德斯坦以及各类权威人士的“衰退论”相互映照，给市场信心带来致命打击。这种来自权威的预期对美国经济中长期走向的影响不容忽视。从行为金融学的理论观点来看，美国战后透支消费、超前消费和炫耀性消费中凸显的欲望、张扬和享乐特征，是“美国梦”的经济表现，其深入骨髓的乐观倾向支撑了美国透支式消费的长久维持。从某种意义上讲，美国经济持续增长很大程度上是因为大多数美国人都坚信美国经济将持续增长，并无所畏惧地维系着强势的消费倾向。
巴菲特的论断可能会让美国人真正害怕起来，而预期走弱无疑将削弱美国消费的稳定趋势，从而进一步加大美国经济陷入衰退的风险。而这一点，正是让我害怕，并真正担心起美国经济未来的根本原因。
至于巴菲特唱衰美国经济的原因，以我的智慧显然无法领悟。我只是依稀记得，巴菲特在那个被人津津乐道的2008年致股东信中说过：“要当心那些油嘴滑舌的所谓专家顾问，当你被他们的夸夸其谈骗得头脑发热，就是他们填满自己腰包的时候。”而且我们都知道巴菲特虽然很有钱，但作为商人，他不可能丢掉赚钱的原始本性。
毫无疑问，巴菲特先高调抛出8000亿美元救市计划，再断言衰退并宣布放弃拯救，对市场信心而言就像是一种使人“从天堂到地狱”的双倍打击。
那么如果美国经济真陷入衰退了，巴菲特会获得什么好处吗？一种可能比较肤浅的猜测是，也许此前宣称“未到抄底时机”的巴菲特会因此找到一个合适的抄底时机？而且，就算跌跌不休之中连抄底时机都没有，至少多元化的巴菲特还能继续将投资目光投向璀璨的新兴市场。
不管巴菲特意欲何为，他的唱衰论调无疑会让市场很受伤。
价值投资已经不管用了
A股已经进入“牛市下半场”了.
牛市下半场”有四个基本特征：
一是板块之间移动快速，
二是个股暴涨暴跌现象严重，
三是赚了指数赔了股价，
四是与国际股市联动加强。
这种情况下股民该如何操作呢？
下半场肯定还会“高潮迭起”，但是这种市场环境下价值投资已经不管用了，因为已经不存在“价值洼地”了，下面必须完全依靠技术分析才能取胜，股民尤其应该注意对消息的收集和分析。
牛市下半场”有四个基本特征：
一是板块之间移动快速，
二是个股暴涨暴跌现象严重，
三是赚了指数赔了股价，
四是与国际股市联动加强。
这种情况下股民该如何操作呢？
下半场肯定还会“高潮迭起”，但是这种市场环境下价值投资已经不管用了，因为已经不存在“价值洼地”了，下面必须完全依靠技术分析才能取胜，股民尤其应该注意对消息的收集和分析。
熊市短线买卖股票纪律
* 强做多，弱做空，多持币，常轻仓（空仓）， 常捂资金短捂股。
*大盘强势60-80%仓位. 大盘弱势20-40%仓位. 千万别满仓（85%）
1. 大盘跌破25日均线和13日均线则轻仓或空仓休息，大盘不站稳13日均线不加仓.
2 买股要选收盘股价站在25日均线上的.跌破25日均线的个股千万别买.
3. 各条均线成多头排列,个股股价在7日均线,13日均线,25日均线的上面.
4. 强势个股成交量缩量收阴线,股价在盘中有触击7日均线或13日均线后收起成下影线,在7日均线或13日均线附近大胆买入.买错也要买.（注意7日均线或13日均线的买点）.
5. 必须选择近5天内最少有3天主力大单动向收红的强势股.
6. 买了个股股价超过7日均线的1.1倍则一定要止赢.
7. 个股股价收盘连续2天跌破13日均线,则一定要止损全卖,卖错也要卖.
8. 任何股票买入后不赚钱一律不得补仓, 弱市中涨5%就卖, 跌破13日均线也卖，无论那只股票，只要亏损达到10%立即割了，永远不要再看他！因为你和他前世无缘！
9. 买进股票的时机最好选择下午2：30以后，第二天开盘有盈利5-10%个点立即卖出.
10. 知足常乐. 千万不能贪. 贪则贫. 个股有赚坚决减仓.
*大盘强势60-80%仓位. 大盘弱势20-40%仓位. 千万别满仓（85%）
1. 大盘跌破25日均线和13日均线则轻仓或空仓休息，大盘不站稳13日均线不加仓.
2 买股要选收盘股价站在25日均线上的.跌破25日均线的个股千万别买.
3. 各条均线成多头排列,个股股价在7日均线,13日均线,25日均线的上面.
4. 强势个股成交量缩量收阴线,股价在盘中有触击7日均线或13日均线后收起成下影线,在7日均线或13日均线附近大胆买入.买错也要买.（注意7日均线或13日均线的买点）.
5. 必须选择近5天内最少有3天主力大单动向收红的强势股.
6. 买了个股股价超过7日均线的1.1倍则一定要止赢.
7. 个股股价收盘连续2天跌破13日均线,则一定要止损全卖,卖错也要卖.
8. 任何股票买入后不赚钱一律不得补仓, 弱市中涨5%就卖, 跌破13日均线也卖，无论那只股票，只要亏损达到10%立即割了，永远不要再看他！因为你和他前世无缘！
9. 买进股票的时机最好选择下午2：30以后，第二天开盘有盈利5-10%个点立即卖出.
10. 知足常乐. 千万不能贪. 贪则贫. 个股有赚坚决减仓.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)