« Respect for others is the issue of the day, Fri., Sept. 29, 2006, 8:29 AM | Main | A matter of trust securities, Fri., Sept. 29, 2006, 4:45 PM »
September 29, 2006
Where serious money ought to hide, Fri., Sept. 29, 2006, 11:03 AM
For the life of me, I cannot understand why any trader would spend 5 minutes observing the CNBC push for a record high Dow 30 number. These CNBC cheerleaders know the truth " it's sitting in their employer's pension plan.
Talk about haircuts, I'm surprised they're not all bald. But at least we can see the long noses. (lol)
General Electric, which owns 100-pct of CNBC and apparently requires their on-air personalities to hold shares of just GE, is a total disaster when it comes to its share price.
On the day the Dow set an all-time closing record high, January 14, 2000, the stocks of the biggest U.S. industrial, consumer, and technology companies were as follows: GE=$43.25; WMT=$61.04; and MSFT=48.63.
Today (last night's close) ADJUSTED FOR DIVIDENDS and splits, those prices are GE=$35.48; WMT=$49.81; and MSFT=27.40.
And, if we adjusted for inflation " probably another -20 pct or more in the past almost 7 years, and the taxes on those dividends, these stocks would be even more of a disaster.
So GE-CNBCTV is not kidding anybody here, nevertheless their own employees. We know it; they know it.
During this extended period of bountiful manure shovelling, you have an opportunity to sell into strength. With the proceeds, I am going to suggest fixed income.
Fixed income does not represent bonds because these too may not be what traders need to hold in their portfolios. By fixed income, I am going to refer to high-dividend yielding equities such as Canadian income trusts.
Now these can be dangerous too. You may have heard ROBTV's Kevin O'Leary talk about the "broken trusts". Those include the ones that dropped in price following their IPO, and/or cut their dividend as business conditions got tough. Moreover, as interest rates went up, there was an alternative in bonds that served to pull money out of some of these trusts.
The bond market has already moved a lot, so I don't think there is much of an opportunity there for the time being.
As you know, I happen not to be a big supporter of trusts. I think it is a quirk of Canadian income tax law that permits slow-growth corporations to return capital in the form of dividends, and in doing so attract the interest of long-term conservative capital owners.
If all corporations were structured as trusts, with high dividend payouts, and secondary offerings required for acquisitions, the playing field would be levelled. Then traders would simply buy shares of the best quality companies, and the so-called "trust" issue would die.
Be that as it may, the broad market today (stocks and bonds) is at ultra-high risk levels, which means that serious owners and managers of capital need to protect their assets more than usual.
So today I am looking at Canadian Income Trusts. There are some " certainly not all " that bear watching and considering as a place of relatively safe haven.
The ones I'll write about later today will be on the recommended list of Canada's major broker-dealers for fundamental reasons given. I respect their research. The value-add I'll try to bring to the table is to filter those many recommended trusts to a smaller list that to me make sense to a conservative account.
For background here, which I'll write up in tomorrow's Week In Review, let me say that I continue to expect very weak economic growth in the U.S. and around the world.
The U.S. trade deficit might decline a modest amount but that is not a resolution of the structural problem. Until that happens, based on greater savings and less spending, I fear a serious recession ahead.
In fact, for 2007 I expect the GDP will average just +1.5 pct, which is significantly less than inflation, which includes two quarters of barely negative growth, and two averaging +3.0 pct.
Where does one hide in such challenging times? Recently I have noted the surge in bonds, telco stocks, and some consumer staples. I started downplaying the economically sensitive stocks like the oils, basic materials (except for metals producers), and industrials.
But the biggest problem is the U.S. housing industry, which soon could become, like Japan for many years, a deflation issue. And without the wealth effect from over-priced houses, it is a fact that U.S. consumers have had to dip into their savings in order to sustain their usual living standard and in many cases to stay afloat.
So, with a slowdown in U.S. consumption, there will be a dip in the international trade balance. But that will lead to the exporting nations, in some cases, dropping their currency rates against the $USD, and the world will fall into an outright currency and trade war.
Less foreign trade and less turnover of money will lead to serious economic problems. Trying to stop and reverse that process is akin to turning about an ocean tanker ship. It is accomplished over a lengthy period of time, based on specific action at the wheel.
I don't see how the United States can stay out of recession if Wall Street and Washington won't even acknowledge a problem. These people seem completely out of touch with Main Street. All day long today CNBC is showing up million-dollar Ferrari automobiles. I think I overheard the Ferrari manager saying that China was a big market for them because the company expected to sell between 100 and 120 cars there next year.
One hundred for 1.7 billion people, and the CNBC "personality" couldn't hide her excitement after asking for a date to drive one. She clearly wanted to "get" hers.
This isn't reality, folks.
It reminds me of the campaign trail for George HW Bush when Clinton beat him. Standing at a Wal-Mart cash register, he said, "My, look at this thing" when referring to a bar-code reader. That innocuous incident burned an impression into my mind that I'll never forget. These people can't relate to you and me.
The Canadian economy, particularly Eastern Canada, has been badly hit by the U.S. slowdown that CNBC refuses to acknowledge. I suspect that European and Asia-Pacific markets are next.
So how do I see this impacting on the Main Street trader? I think traders ought to significantly underweight stocks and overweight cash and short-term bonds. The stocks I'd hold would be a select group of Canadian income trusts, which I'll list this afternoon, plus low beta consumer staples stocks and a USD hedge in a few high cash flow gold and silver miners.
And I'd read all available research reports from Humungous Bank & Broker, reading between the lines, and openly communicating your concerns to your personal financial/investment advisors.
Posted by Posted by Bill Cara on September 29, 2006 11:03:59 AM | Category: Cara Today in the Market
Discourse
Bill...
I think that there is only one thing that can keep the US out of a recession or at least a multi-quarter slowdown - and it is this:
Percentage change at an annual rate of MZM:
2001: 15.8%
2002: 12.6%
2003: 7.4%
2004: 4.0%
2005: 2.2%
The Fed will have to open the floodgates... He's choked it too much - he has no choice.
There was already talk today from the Fed about reviewing their so called "inflation targeting".
In the end - if forced to - they may have to lighten up on targeting to some extent - and go for growth.
All of this of course will revive the 'Gold Bull"
But prior to doing this - I wouldn't be surprised to see one more "assault" on the commodity complex - like in May - to get those prices lower - prior to priming the money pump.
IMHO
tradesman
Posted by: Tradesman
at
September 29, 2006 11:40 AM [link]
When I watch CNBC I only watch when either Liz Claman or Erin Burnett is on, and I keep the volume muted. That gives real meaning to watching the "boob tube"...
Anyway, with the news ticker scrolling across the bottom of the screen, my need to know is satisfied. Everyone should try this, its quite fun watching their body language.
Posted by: smess
at
September 29, 2006 12:47 PM [link]
Bill - FYI, ROBTV already today had one segment, and will later today have another on Income Trusts, accounting qualms, and expected gov't policy initiatives.
Mr. Cara,
You are a world renound market analyst, and as such, it is difficult for me to oppose your current market positions, but I will try. I do agree with you that the market will go into a prolonged downtrend. I started this response with relations of the current economy to the start of Reagan's tenure in office. I wrote about how substantially increased governmental spending on the military along with ever increasing cheap imports caused increased inflationary pressures on the US economy. The more I wrote, I realized that I kept debunking my argument, and that the current political and economic situation merits little or no effect when you take the substantial uptrend of October 1982 - January 2000 into account. Will we see a downtrend over the next year? I do not think so because I do not think that we will see the effects of increased interest rates on GDP growth for at least a year or two. I do think that this is possible because big cap tech stocks will lead the Nasdaq to new highs while the large caps on the DOW will continue to show earnings growth with lowered fuel costs. I think that this will create an uptrend which will be misread and over exuberance will lead to highly inflated prices. Enter poor GDP numbers which will send investors reeling out of the market. Which will cause a prolonged (2-3 year downtrend) followed by a return to current market prices, and then a long long long stagnation/consolodation . Is this kind of speculation possible with current 5.25% fed funds rates? It might be possible, but not sustainable. The lack of borrowed money in the market leaves a big hole in my hypothesis, but only time will tell.
Posted by: eghtball14
at
September 30, 2006 12:26 AM [link]

That is one bizarro Dow chart this morning Bill. They exploded it over the record just to get it and now it looks shaky indeed. Monday should be very interesting.
Posted by: MarkM
at
September 29, 2006 11:19 AM [link]