|
Today's Highlights:
- Regulatory failures aren't the problem, but more regulations can add...
- What the hell are we going to do with our gold stocks?
- Treasuries price deflation, all other markets price inflation
- Wall Street fails to understand nature / risk of dollar devaluation
- Will markets believe the PPI/CPI figures this week?
- Targets for the Dow, Gold, Silver, etc.
- Deflation and weak dollar are contradictory
The SEC met in a roundtable this morning to discuss regulating the hedge fund
industry.
Investors must be demanding it.
Though I don't know any that would throw their money at something without
knowing what they're throwing their money at. Personally, I'd like to keep
it that way.
But the government insists on breeding sheep, if you will. Investors shouldn't
have to do their own due diligence is their motto. Indeed, for their
manipulations and monetary schemes to work, they need participants willing
to believe they can make the maximum amount of money with a minimum amount
of work.
So I'm glad to see the street's top cops producing results!
But how come all the other regulations don't work? How many times are they
gonna' rebuild that chinese wall (Wall Street metaphor for regulatory division
between research and investment banking conflicts) for instance? How come unscrupulous
promotional activities spread to record levels of corruption during the nineties, and
on exchanges that were said to be well regulated?
How come indeed. How about because regulation is not main the problem in the
first place.
Nevertheless, industry insiders expect the costs for hedge fund start ups
to rise. So you see, the regulation itself simply transfers the cost from the lazy investor
to the entrepreneur. But that's not even accurate, because in the long run,
it costs the investor even more, because the powerful can always get around
the rules.
Welcome to the new world order.
Enough of that. Nobody cares anyway, right?
What the Hell are We Going to Do with our Gold Stocks?
Gold prices are generally past their July 2002 peak, extending their bull market
trend, while gold stocks seem like they've gone nowhere since then.
Meanwhile, bonds have made new highs (in price), the Dow is engaging in its
third countertrend rally off last year's bottom in an attempt to reverse the
bear market, and the speculative Nasdaq market averages made higher intermediate
highs within a primary bear market (channel). The bulls say it's because the
weak dollar is going to stimulate the economy, but not inflation.
Well, we all know most of them couldn't tell inflation from a flying saucer.
That's precisely the problem of course. That's why your gold stocks aren't
going higher - because the process of discovery is young.
Your
local central banker knows this, which is one reason why the disinflation noise
is so loud these past few weeks, and particularly after last week's FOMC statement
prodding it along. They probably already know the PPI/CPI figures this week
are likely going to reflect March's drop in energy prices, and other
commodities.
In fact, that's the impetus behind the new high in bond prices in my view
- the bond market's buying the disinflation propaganda hook, line, and sinker.
I bet core prices won't be down as much as the headline number, but that the
headline number will be the bulls' focus - even as it's ignored in months when
it rises.
Still, how do you reconcile, sensibly, the combination of rapidly increasing
money supplies / credit, a falling dollar, rising commodity prices with the
disinflation (and lower yields) theme at the same time?
There is one way. There is the hope that two years worth of Fed rate cuts
will finally kick in to boost corporate profits, and trigger a new bull market
in equity valuations.
In other words, there's still hope the inflation (easy money) will work, instead
of break down, despite the fact that it's breaking down right in front of
our faces.
So gullible are the bulls that this dollar devaluation is a deliberate policy
maneuver, rather than the product of a market saying the dollar's overvalued,
that they continue to price in the optimistic stock market outcomes.
The difference is enormous.
For, in the former case the Fed is seen to have control over inflation / prices.
And bond traders work with the Fed rather than against it, at least so long
as they believe it anyway.
That means, essentially, when the Fed implies interest rates can still be
lowered, traders believe it.
They do.
Every price rise over the past year is explained in terms of a war premium,
or it's isolated to energy costs. The weak dollar is seen to be deliberated,
and promises to stimulate only the right prices.
The problem is the weak dollar is not deliberated, and the Fed doesn't have
half the control over inflation the bond market thinks it does.
Yet it's that very delusion - that there's disinflation or that inflation
is under control - which we'd argue has fueled Wall Street's several comeback
attempts over the past 10 months, by pressuring bond yields.
Correlate the timing of the lows in Bond yields (above) to the Dow's comeback
attempts in the same period, and you'll understand why Wall Street's bear market
has stalled. The lows in yield precede every rally, except the last low came
during the Dow's recent rally.
The
stock and bond markets have generally squared off since last summer. When stock
prices rise, bond yields do, and when stock prices fall, bond yields have.
We've noted this relationship several times in the past, but expected the
dollar's bear market to break it in favor of the bears - both stock and bond.
Instead, perversely, the dollar's bear market combined with the Fed's disinflation
propaganda seems to have kept optimism for earnings high, while the outlook
for yields low. The result has been a decoupling of that relationship in the
bulls' favor.
In other words, rising stock prices didn't inspire rising yields, like they
normally have - since 1998 anyway. Indeed, while analysts up their earnings
outlooks for Wall Street for the remainder of the year, the press was simultaneously
reporting on the prospects for deflation.
So as bond yields fall, the accompanying uptick in earnings outlooks for the
rest of the year makes equities look as cheap (relative to bond yields) as
they've been in more than 10 years.
So if you're looking for reasons as to why your gold shares haven't performed
over the past year despite feeling increasingly right in your outlook, look
no further than the fact that bond traders obviously still don't believe there's
inflation, or they don't believe it'll erode their income, or they are convinced
the right argument is deflation.
Because if that's the case, why not buy other stocks? They're cheap indeed,
provided bond yields remain low, and inflation is really under control like
the Fed says it is.
Of course, bond yields aren't sustainable at these 45 year lows unless there
really is going to be deflation.
But if there was going to be deflation, consider this - the Dow may be cheap
in relation to yields, but it would be expensive relative to earnings.
My point here is there's no deflation priced into the stock market, the dollar,
the commodity markets, or much of anywhere for that matter except for the Treasury
market, which is trading more like a corporate bond than a government bond
anyway.
Unfortunately for the Fed, dollar weakness translates into an environment
where the prices that benefit from the inflation are commodity prices at first,
then employment costs, then pricing power returns in many industries.
Profits will undoubtedly rise, but they'll increasingly be recognized as nominal.
The sectors most likely to benefit from an increase in earnings from dollar
devaluation are the commodity sectors, because they are less overvalued than
the stocks of companies in the export business, and also because commodity
prices rise first in such an environment.
It's really simple. To think that dollar devaluation could result in a benign
healing of the current account deficit and stimulate technology earnings over
commodity earnings is a delusion that I think Wall Street's bulls are going
to have to face the truth on soon.
So that's where gold share investors are left. The inflation, they know is
there. And the evidence has been piling up. But the critical moment - or the
point of recognition if you will - has been evasive. Moreover, if it all somehow resulted
in a new bull market for the Dow, strong enough to turn the dollar back up,
that moment could be pushed further away perhaps. That's what I estimate is
holding back the sector.
Here's the thing though.
As more people realize the inflation is endless, gold prices will get stronger
and stronger, as they've been for the past few years, and for the past few
weeks in fact. And as they get stronger, it means that participants are devaluing
the dollar, or that their dollar outlook is increasingly bearish, which means
there's too many dollars. It's that simple. Even the Kudlowians know that rising
gold prices mean there's inflation.
What they probably don't understand is that it really means there's an increasing perception
that the inflation is endless, and confidence in the economy/currency is
dropping.
We know that chances are the PPI number is going to be weak this week. But
the question is whether people will buy it, or not. I'd like to think the markets
will place more weight on real time developments than those figures in determining
the inflation outlook. But I fear what might happen is that the figures will
boost the Fed's disinflation theme, depress gold prices, and boost the dollar.
In other words, I fear the market will keep believing the Fed's data. Yet
we've been heartened by the fact that gold prices have been strong all week
long amid ongoing dollar weakness. So far, at least by those markets, participants
aren't believing the Fed's claims. We'll see if that changes by Friday I suspect.
The
key to the gold share market then, at this point, is whether the new highs
in bond prices this week stimulate further gold strength and dollar weakness,
or whether they can break the Dow out of this 10 month range, and strengthen
the dollar.
One way or another, the bond is setting itself up for a big fall. If the Dow
breaks out, for instance, and markets believe that the resulting rise in yields
is the result of rising stock values, it's possible that the gold sector would
suffer.
But to take that bet, I think you'd have to believe one of the following:
- there's no inflation at the source of it all
- earnings will come back so strong that a rise equity values could tolerate
a rise in yield
On the other hand, if gold shares rose on a break out in the Dow, it would
mean to us that the gold market doesn't believe the Dow's move sustainable.
The higher high in the Nasdaq last week has got some gold sector investors
concerned that the broader market averages might follow. But so far the idea
hasn't attracted many suitors. Even some of the old bulls seem to distrust
the current move on account that the leadership is speculative.
Personally,
I don't think the Dow will break out, and if it does by some chance, I doubt
the move could attract enough believers, or come with the earnings, to sustain
it.
When we look at the charts, what we see is that the dollar is in a solid downtrend;
gold and silver prices continue to be under accumulation and are currently
poised to break out themselves; and that all stocks - gold stocks included
- have pretty much gone nowhere since last June/July.
But when we look at a chart of the Dow, and a chart of the AMEX Gold bugs
index, we note that the Dow is still confined to a bear market sequence and
that gold stocks are still controlled by a bullish sequence - see charts below.
Moreover, while the nature of the Dow pattern (June to May) appears rather
neutral overall, the gold stock charts reflect a degree of accumulation - note
the ascending triangle in the chart of the HUI below.
Still,
investors have grown impatient. Understandably so, since the evidence of inflation
is quite conspicuous.
But I think it's not quite correct to criticize the lack of leadership by
gold shares in the gold price move to $390 earlier this year.
I think it's important to recognize that while the AMEX gold bugs index reversed
a primary bear market sequence in June 2002, gold prices didn't reveal a primary
bullish sequence until December.
In other words, the gold price spike was catch up. Now the question is whether
it will continue.
The bears tested bullish support for both gold and gold shares in March. It
held. It's correct I think to now expect gold shares to lead again as
the outlook for gold prices increasingly brightens.
And
they have been outperforming gold prices to a degree.
So our outlook is this:
The Dow may or may not break out, but gold shares will, and they'll break
out along with gold and silver prices.
If the Dow does break out in such an environment, its back will break on the
first hint of a serious bond market slide (or higher interest rates).
Our six to twelve month targets then are as follows:
- HUI = 200 to 230
- DJIA = 5000 to 7000
- Gold = $425 to $475
- Silver = $6 to $7
- Dollar/Yen = 100 to 105
- Dollar Index = 85 to 90
Can't Have Deflation Amid Weak Currency, Sorry...
I think if you're bullish on gold and expect deflation at the same time, what
it means is you're afraid of being right.
If you're bullish on gold, you have to be bearish on the dollar (unless you're
not that bullish in the first place). If you expect deflation, however, what
you expect is a contracting stock of money to result in an increasing value
for the currency, rather than for goods or services.
The prices for goods and services, as you know, are impacted by changes in
the value of the currency as well as changes in demand and supply.
Consider it this way. There are two markets operating simultaneously. One
where the demand and supply for a good or service interact to produce value
for it, and another where the demand and supply for money (or currency) interact
to produce value for it. Together they express as price.
They aren't wholly independent of each other, but can be theoretically considered
that way. Moreover, it's just as correct to say one dollar is worth a cheap
beer, as it is to say a cheap beer costs one dollar. But today, we've been
trained to ignore the former proposition. Anyway, the point is the dollar isn't
worth a cheap beer!
The only time an increase in money supply doesn't result in an immediate devaluation
of the currency is when participants are convinced demand for money is growing
as fast as its supply.
In any case, how do you have deflation if you accept, as we do, that the currency
is overvalued?
1) either you're convinced that money supply will somehow contract, or
2) you mean deflation in some sectors and inflation in others.
Number 1 is easy. It can't contract. Good luck. It never has, and if they
run out of ideas on how to increase money supply, no problemo, we've can send
'em some. The only string the Fed's pushing on is the one tied to your leg,
and they're pulling not pushing it.
I've asked readers to go out and find us a period since FDR abandoned the
(phony) gold standard in 1934 where the stock of money contracted without briskly
recovering. I've never heard back from anyone, and I couldn't find the evidence
myself. I wonder, is there a connection between that and the fact that the
closest we've come to deflation since 1929-1933 (when the dollar was fixed
to gold) was in 1982 after the dollar fell so far and wide it became, well,
undervalued?
Yup. You bet there is.
So let's rule out number 1 once and for all. The real challenge is not how
to increase money supply, it's how to restrict inflation.
As for number 2, we agree with it.
The main problem with inflation is that it produces malinvestments, which
means the economy over produces one thing or another, and underproduces others-
which in turn means it's unsustainable, and a host of other things as a consequence.
So it's conceivable that some industries, like cars, technology, and even
housing, have been overproduced relative to some concept of real demand. In
those industries, prices may come down even if inflation (monetary)
remains rampant.
Let's put it this way - there is always inflation. The problem analysts have
is knowing how it impacts value. In other words, understanding the difference
between what's real and what isn't (real = market driven, rather than inflation
induced).
Yet understanding this impact is where we must begin in our assessment of
the sectors that inflation has undervalued and those that it has overvalued,
which will help in determining which prices will fall and which are going to
rise, as a result.
Yes, that's right, prices can fall during an inflation if the inflation creates
the illusion of value where it isn't. It simply means while one thing is gaining
in value, something else is falling in value. Those goods that gain in value
as a result of inflation will become overproduced. Those goods that lose value
become underproduced. Of course, this assumes the heretic idea that money is
not neutral.
However, as previously proposed, if everyone perceived the inflation to begin
with, "any" increase in the money supply would immediately manifest in all
prices. So none of the malinvestment would happen in the first place, theoretically.
Indeed, the process assumes that inflation isn't perceived... that it is hidden!
They hide it by persuading you it's something else, like liquidity, or elastic
money, rather than inflation.
For the past two decades, profuse monetary inflation has overvalued paper
assets at the expense of commodities, while simultaneously fueling present
and future demand for those 'cheap' commodities. The result has been
an economy that has structured itself around the production of overvalued paper.
But now that the inflation no longer can sustain increases in the value of
that paper (or equity) and expectations for growing real profits, a revaluation
has begun, and consequently, scarcities have been revealed in some of the commodities,
particularly the ones that are on the Fed's blacklist for rising.
This process results in the discovery of inflation (that it exists, and
that it explains most growth), and a healing of the economy.
That indeed is what the gold bull market is about.
The markets are efficient, but not as efficient as they could be if they were
in reality as perfect as they were in theory. I mean perfect in the sense of
'rational expectations' theory, rather than simply 'perfect competition.'
But one thing I'm certain of is this: if you expect deflation (in terms of
the dollar), you shouldn't be bullish on gold prices. If the supply of money
per chance were to shrink, but so did the demand for dollars, the dollar would
still fall, and you'd be right to be bullish on gold.
Deflation means the impact of a shrinking stock of money on prices. Remember
our example of two markets? That means that by deflation, you mean this impact
affects an increase in the value of the currency such that the prices of goods/services
generally fall.
So unless you are prepared to accept a rising dollar value in your outlook,
forget about the idea of deflation. And if you are able to develop the case
for a rising dollar value, forget about gold.
The only reason to buy gold is if you're bearish on the dollar's value, and
perceive the policy of inflation to go on indefinitely until it results in
a crack up boom, which means precisely that the dollar falls in value against
everything. Accordingly, the case for gold is strong.
It's so strong in fact, that it's a wonder the government hasn't discussed
investing America's social security fund in gold stocks.
|