« It's all about capex, stupid, Wed., Mar. 15, 2006, 5:40 PM | Main | Week #11 (2006-03-18) in Review »
March 16, 2006
Capex or no capex?, Thurs., Mar. 16, 2006, 6:59 AM
There are points late in every economic cycle when business corporations push the outsourcing and the demand on their people and physical resources too far. They reach a point of capacity utilization where decisions must be made to either slow the rate of unit growth or raise prices. We are at that point.
The issue is now capex or no capex. In a growing economy, if it's no capex, the alternative is either lose market share or add to price inflation. It's usually a combination of all of these, but as Garzarelli opines, the emphasis will be on capital expenditure.
Today a reader commented about capex.
"I've been hearing economists for years say that business spending will "take the baton" and "pick up the slack" as the consumer gets tapped out on credit. Instead, big business sits on their wad of cash and buys back their own shares rather than make "risky" investments. A great balance sheet doesn't automatically lead to capex." /'tremendous11'
Companies are required to increase capex, i.e., capital expenditure, whenever factory capacity utilization reaches extremely high levels. In my notebook article (March 13), I noted that "Canada's capacity utilization rate stands at 86.3 pct for December. People and systems are not that efficient without rates (that high) leading to inflation".
I was on the run that day or I would have expanded the discussion to include capex. Today, the factory capacity utilization number in the U.S. is going to be about 82 pct. That's too high, without forcing issues.
As for me today, I'm off to the airport in 30 minutes, so I will close this blog until I return late Sunday or Monday afternoon (since I have a meeting on Monday morning). I have very important meetings coming up offshore, so I won't be taking my laptop or phone. I'm there to do a job, and I need to focus.
But, I do not intend to make any waves here. Some readers have been thinking I might stop blogging, so I will set the record straight, again.
Blogging free to the Little People is my mission. I want to help people better understand capital markets so they can either take decision-making into their own hands or be able to better communicate with their advisor.
In this blog I try to stay away from telling you what to do. That's a job that involves a need to know you personally, which can only be done by an advisor or by yourself. So all I do here is give opinions, try to explain things, give examples I have experienced, and so forth.
But nothing more because I need you to do the heavy lifting.
In my view, which is something my late Dad taught me, it's wrong to go to a salesperson to ask them what you need. Most financial advisors hold a license to sell securities, not provide independent and objective advice. My gripe with the sell-side is that they call themselves advisors when in fact they are regulated salespersons. This is not semantics; it's a deceptive practice that leads to all kinds of problems.
Having risen in my career to build a major broker-dealer on the top floor of the stock exchange tower in Toronto, I know what the sell-side is. I love the sell-side, but there are things about it that I cannot accept, so I attack those points by blogging, and attending formal and informal sessions of government and securities regulators.
It's up to us " the Little People who own capital " to improve the system for ourselves. Our capital is at stake. The sell-side is organized, while unfortunately the buy-side is not, so we all have to pull together.
Society needs it.
I'll see you in a couple days, when I return to blogging, as usual. ciao.
Posted by Posted by Bill Cara on March 16, 2006 06:59:23 AM | Category: Cara Today in the Market
Discourse
gold spot price...when look at the chart it looks like sideways action for now......i don't consider any price movement meaningful unless it is above or below the trading range....imo
Posted by: Bullring
at
March 17, 2006 11:13 AM [link]
look at goog on balance vol. i wouldn't even day trade that one right now....too much risk even interday
Posted by: Bullring
at
March 17, 2006 11:27 AM [link]
MARK HULBERT
Contrarian case for gold over stocks
Last Update: 12:01 AM ET Mar 17, 2006
Contrarian case for gold over stocks
Hulbert, MarketWatch
Last Update: 12:01 AM ET Mar 17, 2006
ANNANDALE, Va. (MarketWatch) -- At the end of November, I reported that, based on a contrarian analysis of investment newsletter sentiment, gold was a better bet over the ensuing three months than the stock market.
Read Nov. 30, 2005 column
The contrarians were right in this case. Since that column was written, gold bullion has gained 5%.
Contrarian analysis today reaches the same conclusion as it did three and one-half months ago. Despite gold more than doubling the return of the stock market since early December, editors of gold timing newsletters remain significantly more bearish than do editors of stock timing newsletters.
Since contrarians believe that the markets rarely accommodate the majority, this suggests that there is a stronger sentiment case to be made for gold right now than stocks.
Consider first the Hulbert Stock Newsletter Sentiment Index (HSNSI), which reflects the average equity exposure among a subset of short-term stock market timing newsletters tracked by the Hulbert Financial Digest. As of Thursday's close, the HSNSI stood at 38.1%.
Contrast that with the current reading for the Hulbert Gold Newsletter Sentiment Index (HGNSI), which is based on the average gold market exposure among a subset of gold-timing newsletters. As of Thursday night, the HGNSI stood at minus 19.6%, which means that the average gold timing newsletter is recommending subscribers be net short the market.
In fact, the current HGNSI reading is not that far above its record low reading of minus 31.3%, suggesting that the average gold timer right now is pretty close to being as bearish as he has been in recent years.
This contrast between newsletter sentiment in the stock and gold arenas is very telling. Gold is less than 3% below its multi-decade high set less than two months ago, while the major stock market averages are well below their highs from prior to the 2000-2002 bear market. The S&P 500 , for example, is some 15% below its March 2000 high, while the NASDAQ Composite index is more than 50% below its high from that month.
And yet the average gold timer has reacted by running to the exits. To be sure, the average stock market timer is not exhibiting extreme bullishness. But he is nevertheless showing himself to be confident that the stock market's trend is up.
Apart from being weaker than gold in coming weeks, how does contrarian analysis suggest the stock market itself will perform? I currently would interpret the HSNSI as being in more or less neutral territory, thus providing relatively little guidance as to what is likely to transpire.
On the positive side of the equation, the HSNSI has pulled back from its early-December readings above 60%, a level that I interpreted bearishly (incorrectly, as it turned out). But, on the other hand, the HSNSI has not fallen to the very bearish levels that in recent years have marked the beginnings of major rallies.
Posted by: stockman
at
March 17, 2006 12:06 PM [link]
It's alive!! Bill's Blog doesn't sleep.
INTC has hit some low spots today is it near accumulation range yet?
Posted by: C.Note
at
March 17, 2006 12:15 PM [link]
C.note
Intel might get a bounce here with general market but the next few Quarters will be tough for the comiditized product line.
http://www.digitimes.com/systems/a20060317A1001.html
Andrew
Posted by: Andy
at
March 17, 2006 1:22 PM [link]
Maybe you can buy some of CEO's shares...
INTEL CORP- [INTC] History
OTELLINI PAUL S CE 03/14/06 113,650 $ 19.78- 19.88 700,047 $ 2,252,896
o OTELLINI PAUL S CE 03/14/06 78,350 $ 19.66- 19.77 813,697 $ 1,546,513
Posted by: stockman
at
March 17, 2006 1:37 PM [link]
Thanks Andy/stockman. Think I'll study this one a tad loooonger.
Posted by: C.Note
at
March 17, 2006 1:55 PM [link]
stockman/bullring-
$USD SMASHED. Gold does nothing other than technical bounce off oversold Monday and Tuesday. Not good.
Posted by: MarkM
at
March 17, 2006 2:17 PM [link]
When insiders are on the buy side as their stock hits a 52 week low, I'll join them in accumulating shares. But these moves to 'diversify' while shareholders are hanging on and watching new lows... RED FLAG for me.
Name BARRETT CRAIG R
Title Chairman of the Board
Remaining Shares 3 Mil
Trade Date 01/30/06
Transaction Sold
Quantity 284,000
Price $21.64
Value $6.15 Mil
Posted by: stockman
at
March 17, 2006 2:19 PM [link]
het..mgm..har..rimm....all probably have more upside to them
Posted by: Bullring
at
March 17, 2006 3:02 PM [link]
My basket of miners performed right along with XAU while GLD couldn't hitch a ride, not that any went that far today and it ain't over.
Posted by: C.Note
at
March 17, 2006 3:12 PM [link]
bullring-
To me it looks like topping action again and ready to roll over for the third leg down. Could just be basing. If so it needs more volume. Can't hang in midair forever like this. Next couple of weeks should tell. We'll see.......
Posted by: MarkM
at
March 17, 2006 3:44 PM [link]
My comment a few weeks ago about NEM and RGLD were proven wrong, for now at least.
Anyways, I believe EUR/USD will break above 1.2300, forming a double bottom.
Oil is bullish as well, I believe a breakout to higher levels is seen soon.
Copper broke out today, all these factors are bullish for gold.
Posted by: FirstConsul
at
March 18, 2006 2:22 AM [link]
FirstConsul-
The specs drove the copper price on CEOs comments (PD). I am very wary of that little breakout. I guess we are on opposite sides of these trades. That's what makes a market!
Posted by: MarkM
at
March 18, 2006 5:42 AM [link]
Well, the market is always right :D, it doesn't really matter if it's PD's CEO's comments or Jim Cramer's comments.
I'm not long copper currently, but it's a commodity that's going up, as is silver, so it will help gold.
I've seeked for a lot of more evidence to support gold.
1)Oil has a bull MACD divergence, as does the CRB index
2)The word oil has seemingly disappeared from the media, cooling sentiment
3)This little article at Reuters Recommends (http://today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=reutersEdge&storyID=2006-03-17T191758Z_01_N17211740_RTRUKOC_0_US-MARKETS-FOREX-DOLLAR.xml) "Dollar gets battered but "Armageddon" not here yet" Up to now, media has been bearish on the USD. It seems they're changing and I'll take their position gladly.
4)Iranian oil bourse starts trading on March 20th(unless Americans blow it up on that day). Another threat to USD domainance.
Posted by: FirstConsul
at
March 18, 2006 9:10 AM [link]
Here is an excellent link for Gold Bullion data and commentary - just be aware that the COT data is a week old until Monday but otherwise it's current.
Posted by: spot
at
March 18, 2006 9:13 AM [link]
markm.....in my trade account i sold gold...as a trader i always sell into the bounce...i was a little disappointed in the size of the bounce but thats the way it goes sometimes......but in my ira i still have gold....i would not be surpised if gold trends down into april like oil did last year before it took off......i may be more likly to hang onto the shares in my ira than others because i bought X amount of shares when bill called the bottom in early nov.....then i sold enough shares to get my original capital back and i'm letting the remaining shares ride....so i am not too concerned holding since i have my original capital back...i will hang onto these shares until i see the long term trend change or a blow out rally.....but current conditions from a trading stand point i will in and out until i see gold break its range once it does this i will hold...but long term still looks good to me.
Posted by: Bullring
at
March 18, 2006 9:35 AM [link]
Didn't intend to get in a "whose is bigger"/"who is smarter" tiff here. I am not a newsletter writer, just one of Bill's regulars.
I am long GLD so if I say something that is taken as negative, I am talking against my portfolio. I trade longer term so I miss some S/T trades based on headlines or what I consider non-sustainable moves.
Bullring, I think that's great trading and good strategy. Range seems to be well defined here at least as to support. Let's see what it does in the next few weeks. There's plenty of time to make money before THIS is over. I am confident of that. Less confident on commodities S/T and intermediate as the Bear approaches.
Posted by: MarkM
at
March 18, 2006 11:52 AM [link]
FirstConsl:
I take it you live in the 'Middle Kingdom' from your postings here. This morning's LATimes has a great article about about the thirst for commodities and the sacrifice and crime taking place to use same. Take a read of:
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-chinametals19mar19,0,6454847.story?track=tothtml
Posted by: C.Note
at
March 19, 2006 7:15 AM [link]
Two charts that give pause for concern...
The Commercials have ramped up their net short position in SP500 futures to the highest level in more three years...
and there is some kind of loud sucking sound coming from under the market...
Posted by: JIM
at
March 19, 2006 8:41 AM [link]
JIM-
We (the retail investors) are being gamed pure and simple. Less and less leadership(except for, that's right, HOMEBULDERS, up 8% recently). Fewer new highs. Can you say "Top"?
I am not participating in the Jim Cramer/Elaine Garzarelli rally. If this thing breaks support I doubt that even the Fed can stop the fall. JMHO. See everybody on the other side of this one.
Posted by: MarkM
at
March 19, 2006 8:49 AM [link]
To Cnote: Lol, good guess.
Yeah there are people here too who take copper from wires to sell and make money.
To Jim and MarkM:
I think bonds and utilities ought to be watched carefully, if bonds break down and utilities become more bearish, it will only be time before market crashes.
Posted by: FirstConsul
at
March 19, 2006 9:30 AM [link]
stockman - Do you recall our discussion on the $HGX and the role of "bias" against that Index?
From the look of the $HGX daily chart today, I would say that there is NO role for "bias" on the short term; although, I do believe that one must keep track of "rumors", at least for this Index, as one goes into FOMC week.
How are you thinking about $BTK stocks. The Index just needs a trend break and hold for a possible good move up; of course, that might not happen.
Posted by: spot
at
March 19, 2006 10:29 AM [link]
stockman - Forget that question about $BTK stocks; it's probably too overbought for any interest in it.
But then, just about everything is too overbought these days except NatGas (and that is starting to look good now if it will continue to track in its weekly range, jmho).
Posted by: spot
at
March 19, 2006 10:49 AM [link]
All - Here are some interesting elements for a systematic approach to screening for stocks:
Market observations via stock screening:
http://ronsen.blogspot.com/
Posted by: spot
at
March 19, 2006 1:06 PM [link]
spot-
yes those homers are something, shortly after those comments I posted that form 4's were filed on WCI and then last week TOA. and what is Mr. Lyon thinking???
everything in me says these stocks are a terrible place to be... then again I always give credit to the insiders for knowing their business value better than traders.
only for the nimble I'd say-
long WCI, TOA
Posted by: stockman
at
March 19, 2006 6:54 PM [link]
The traders' commitments for Treasury bonds showed commercials long 419,329, down 17,869; short 296,228, down 24,569. The total net long commercial position is therefore 123,101, up 6700 from the previous week, and one of the highest readings recorded in the past six years. Seems to be signaling that inflation may weaken.
Garzarelli's call for increased capex spending may be what saves the economy as the consumer has clearly hit the wall as shown in this report on the state of household finances by Northern Trust:
Posted by: JIM
at
March 19, 2006 10:01 PM [link]

Interesting pattern in the gold spot price over the last few weeks. Immediately before opening, the spot price is up $1-$2. At 9:30, it sells off completely, dropping the price $2-
$3. Should I be reading any significance into this, or is this expected behavior during the non-peak season?
Posted by: EJStockman
at
March 17, 2006 10:13 AM [link]