The U.S. risks sending the world into a depression as its bailouts of failed companies rob healthy businesses of capital, investor Jim Rogers said.
“The U.S. is taking assets from competent people and giving them to incompetent people,” said Rogers, chairman of Singapore-based Rogers Holdings and the author of books including “Investment Biker” and “Adventure Capitalist.” “That’s bad economics.”
The U.S. government should let American International Group Inc., whose fourth-quarter loss was the worst in corporate history, go bankrupt, Rogers added in a Bloomberg Television interview today. Congress approved a $700 billion bank bailout package in October, and President Barack Obama’s administration has suggested it may need an additional $750 billion.
The U.S. is repeating the mistakes made by Japan in the 1990s and risks creating “zombie banks” by rescuing failed financial services companies that should have been allowed to go under, Rogers said.
New York-based AIG has received $173 billion in government aid, and had earmarked $1 billion in retention pay for about 4,600 of the company’s 116,000 employees so they won’t leave.
The Treasury this week intends to provide more information about a $1 trillion plan to remove distressed mortgage assets from banks’ balance sheets. The Federal Reserve is also scheduled this week to start the first phase of a $1 trillion program to revive the market for securities backed by consumer and business loans.
Oil Prices
Oil prices may rise to record levels in the future because of depleting reserves and a lack of major field discoveries, Rogers said. Crude oil in New York hit a record $147.27 a barrel in July and traded at $46.98 at 12:13 p.m.Singapore time.
“Reserves of oil are going down all over the world,” Rogers said. “The price of oil has to go much, much higher. I don’t know if the oil price will go up to record level in three years or five years. I don’t know when but I know it is.”
People should be prepared for inflation as governments worldwide are printing money to prop up economies at a time when commodities supply is under pressure, Rogers said.
“We’re going to have serious, serious inflation down the road,” said Rogers, who owns gold and silver. “I wish I knew when.”
Calls to return to the gold standard, when currencies were backed by bullion owned by governments, are flawed because it is “not going to solve our problems,” he also said.
China’s stimulus spending will help its economy overcome the global recession sooner than the U.S. and other countries, investor Jim Rogers said.
China’s reserves allow the government to spend on projects that will make the nation more efficient and competitive as the global economy recovers, said Rogers, the author of “A Bull in China: Investing Profitably in the World’s Greatest Market.” Signs China is taking steps to liberalize its currency will also benefit the country, he added.
“I certainly expect China to come out of it sooner than the U.S.,” Rogers, chairman of Singapore-based Rogers Holdings, said in a Bloomberg TV interview in the city-state. “They seem to be spending the money on the right things. China is doing a far better job than the others.”
Premier Wen Jiabao reiterated last week the government’s pledge to “significantly increase” investment in 2009 to help counter the slowest growth in seven years. He didn’t specify new stimulus spending in addition to a 4 trillion yuan ($585 billion) plan announced in November.
The People’s Bank of China cut interest rates five times in the final four months of last year, including the biggest single reduction since the 1997-98 Asian financial crisis. The government is targeting growth of 8 percent in 2009, after the economy slowed to a 6.8 percent gain in the fourth quarter.
Yuan, Yen, Dollar
China will allow trade settlement in yuan with Hong Kong soon, central bank Governor Zhou Xiaochuan said at a briefing in Beijing on March 6. President Li Lihui of Bank of China Ltd., the nation’s largest foreign-exchange lender, said yesterday in Beijing the bank is already conducting trial international yuan settlements in Shanghai and Hong Kong.
“I’m glad to see they’re taking yet another step towards convertibility,” said Rogers, who in April 2006 accurately predicted oil would reach $100 a barrel and gold $1,000 an ounce. He said he owns Japanese yen as he expects more of the money to “come home.”
Rogers added he plans to sell his remaining U.S. dollar holdings later this year because the world’s largest economy isn’t a “safe haven” for investors.
“I plan later this year to get out of the rest of my U.S. dollars,” he said. “It’s had an artificial rally too but it’s a terribly flawed currency. The U.S. is printing money as fast as it can and that’s always throughout history led to currency problems down the road.”
Rogers on June 30 advised investors to avoid the dollar “at all costs” as the U.S. economy slows, and favored commodities. The dollar has risen against nine of the Group of 10 currencies since then, according to data tracked by Bloomberg.
Rogers added he remains bullish on agriculture and that commodities are “the only area of the world economy I know which is benefiting.” He said he owns “some” gold and silver, and regards silver as “cheaper.”
Water, power and other infrastructure companies’ shares are favored because their earnings are less vulnerable during the global slowdown, Rogers said.
“Gold is a commodity but gold is one of my least favorite commodities. There are other commodities that are going to do a whole lot better. Supply and demand are completely out of whack for nearly all commodities, and the inventories – they've run down the inventories of nearly every commodity in the world. The exception, of course, is gold.
Gold exploration has continued to expand for the past 20 years, gold mining production has continued to expand – it certainly hasn't declined in the past 25 years even though gold is down, and gold inventories are at the highest in the history of the world. I mean all the gold that's ever been mined is still out there. The Central Banks own it. The Central Banks want to sell it. I'm not saying they're right or wrong, mind you, don't get me wrong. I'm not making a value judgment here. I'm just dealing with facts. So I own gold. It's in my index. I own a couple of gold-mining shares but I am less optimistic on gold than I am on most other commodities. But I do own it. For centuries, people have tried to figure out how to turn lead into gold – do you know that alchemist's quest: "If we could figure out how to turn lead into gold, we'd all be rich." I would submit to you that you should figure out a way to turn gold into lead and you'd make a lot more in the next few years because lead would go up more, percentage wise.”
Something that gold investors often fail to realize is that the aboveground supply of gold can increase just as fast as – or much faster than – the supply of money. This is an important part of why the view of gold as a “solid currency” is a fallacy.
Gold inventories are currently the highest they've been in the history of the world. And throughout the twenty-year bear market in base metals, gold exploration skyrocketed. Even in 2003, 75% of mining exploration was allocated to gold, up from 50% only three years earlier.
I do not have the current CRB Commodity Yearbook figures, but it is without a doubt that gold exploration has dramatically increased since then, with new mines coming on stream, in response to high market prices.
In other words, the supply of gold is huge and expanding, especially relative to that of every other commodity. And since gold is an element, it cannot be destroyed. Compare this with a commodity such as crude oil, which gets used up and can't be renewed.
As you can see, production skyrocketed after 1980, even when prices went into a multi-decade bear market. The current numbers are probably substantially higher than what is reported there, possibly going right through the top of the chart, in response to such high market prices.
As for the demand side, the demand for gold used in jewelry – the commodity's staple use – is so small that the CRB Commodity Yearbook doesn't even bother to report the figures anymore. All demand for gold has been falling – except for use by financial speculators.
I have no idea where the gold price will go, but with the market at a thirty-year high, today's buyers have no margin of safety. And in terms of supply and demand, I can hardly see why gold investors would be concerned about the money supply: unlike the supply of gold, the money supply has not increased by several hundred percent.
If we look at M2, the monetary aggregate used to forecast inflation, it has only expanded by about 10% from where it was a year ago:
Individual money market accounts are included in M2, but wider measures of the money market – like commercial paper and repurchase agreements – are included in M3.
The Fed discontinued its reporting for most of the components of this latter aggregate, but my guess is that the extreme stress in the credit markets probably would have shown M3 sharply contracting, hence the need for a massive liquidity injection.
While the Federal Reserve can print money, so can the giant mining companies ramp up gold exploration and production. And the facts show that the latter have been much more successful in supplying the market.
While this may be a vote of confidence for the free enterprise system, it presents an ugly picture for today's buyers of gold.
It turns out that the Zell-Blackstone deal, as well as the Blackstone IPO, marked the exact top of their respective markets: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/07/business/07properties.html?_r=1&em=&pagewanted=all As a general rule, mega M&A deals always tend to mark the top of a market. We saw this in the 1980s with Merger Mania, culminating in the historic $30 billion RJR Nabisco LBO – right in front of the early 1990s recession. We saw it in early 2000, with the $164 billion AOL-Time Warner deal, one of the greatest value-destroying transactions of all time. The merger agreement was filed in February of 2000, the market's apex. By 2002, the value of AOL was written down by $100 billion. And, of course, the financials: MBNA and Bank of America in 2006; Bank of New York and Mellon in summer of 2007; and Bank of America buying Countrywide Financial in early 2008, to name a few. However, the worst may be RBS and Fortis' colossal $100 billion acquisition of ABN AMRO in October of 2007 – again the exact top of the market. Fortis is now defunct and RBS is being propped up by the British government. By contrast, heavy bankruptcies are a positive sign. And sharply-reduced capacity and inventories, especially when they have been depressed for long periods of time and demand appears to be improving, are signs of a market bottom. This is probably where agriculture markets are right now. It continues to appear that agriculture may well enter a bull market over the next few years.
Talk about an absolutely killer case of stagflation.
…
MENDOTA, Calif. — The country’s biggest agricultural engine, California’s sprawling Central Valley, is being battered by the recession like farmland most everywhere. But in an unlucky strike of nature, the downturn is being deepened by a severe drought that threatens to drive up joblessness, increase food prices and cripple farms and towns.
Across the valley, towns are already seeing some of the worst unemployment in the country, with rates three and four times the national average, as well as reported increases in all manner of social ills: drug use, excessive drinking and rises in hunger and domestic violence.
With fewer checks to cash, even check-cashing businesses have failed, as have thrift stores, ice cream parlors and hardware shops. The state has put the 2008 drought losses at more than $300 million, and economists predict that this year’s losses could swell past $2 billion, with as many as 80,000 jobs lost.
“People are saying, ‘Are you a third world country?’ ” said Robert Silva, the mayor of Mendota, which has a 35 percent unemployment rate, up from the more typical seasonal average of about 20 percent. “My community is dying on the vine.”
Even as rains have washed across some of the state this month, greening some arid rangeland, agriculture officials say the lack of rain and the prospect of minimal state and federal water supplies have already led many farmers to fallow fields and retreat into survival mode with low-maintenance and low-labor crops.
Last year, during the second year of the drought, more than 100,000 acres of the 4.7 million in the valley were left unplanted, and experts predict that number could soar to nearly 850,000 acres this year.
All of which could mean shorter supplies and higher prices in produce aisles — California is the nation’s biggest producer of tomatoes, almonds, avocados, grapes, artichokes, onions, lettuce, olives and dozens of other crops — and increased desperation for people like Agustin Martinez, a 20-year veteran of the fields who generally makes $8 an hour picking fruit and pruning.
“If I don’t have work, I don’t live,” said Mr. Martinez, a 39-year-old father of three who was waiting in a food line in Selma, southeast of Fresno. “And all the work is gone.”
In Mendota, the self-described cantaloupe center of the world, a walk through town reveals young men in cowboy hats loitering, awaiting the vans that take workers to the fields. None arrive.
The city’s main drag has a few quiet businesses — a boxing gym, a liquor store — and tellingly, two busy pool halls. The owner of one hall, Joseph R. Riofrio, said that his family had also long owned a grocery and check-cashing business in town, but that he had just converted to renting movies, figuring that people would rather stay at home in hard times.
“We’re not going to give up,” Mr. Riofrio said. “But people are doing bad.”
The situation is particularly acute in towns along the valley’s western side, where farmers learned on Friday that federal officials anticipate a “zero allocation” of water from the Central Valley Project, the huge New Deal system of canals and reservoirs that irrigates three million acres of farmland. If the estimate holds and springtime remains dry, it would be first time ever that farmers faced a season-long cutoff from federal waters.
“Farmers are very resilient, we make things happen, but we’ve never had a zero allocation,” said Stephen Patricio, president of Westside Produce, a melon handler and harvester. “And I might not be very good at math, but zero means zero.”
While California has suffered severe dry spells before, including a three-year stint ending in 1977 and a five-year drought in the late ’80s and early ’90s, the ill effects now are compounded by the recession and other factors.
Federal, state and local officials paint a grim picture of a system taxed as it has never been before by a growing population, environmental concerns and a labyrinth of water supply contracts and agreements, some dating to the early 20th century. In addition to the federal water supplies, farmers can irrigate with water provided by the state authorities, drawn from wells and bought or transferred from other farmers. Such water may not always be the best quality, said Mark Borba, a fourth-generation farmer in Huron, Calif.
“But it’s wet,” he said.
Richard Howitt, the chairman of the agricultural and resource economics department at the University of California, Davis, estimates that 60,000 to 80,000 jobs could be lost — including in ancillary businesses — and that as much as $2.2 billion in crop and other losses could be caused by restrictions on water and the drought, which he called “hydrologically as bad as 1977 and economically as bad as 1991.”
“You’re talking about field workers, processing handlers, people packing melons, trucking hay, sprayers, people selling tractors, people selling lunches to people selling tractors,” Mr. Howitt said. “And in some of these small west-side towns, it’s going to hit the people who are least able to adapt to it.”
One of the hardest hit areas is the farmland served by the Westlands Water District, which receives water exclusively from the Central Valley Project and distributes it to 600,000 acres in Fresno and KingsCounties. Sarah Woolf, a spokeswoman for the district, said that her 700 members expected to leave 300,000 to 400,000 acres fallow and that some might not come back to farm at all.
“Everyone’s trying to go down fighting,” Ms. Woolf said. “But there will be significant companies that will go out of business, as well as families that have been farming for generations, if it doesn’t get better.”
The outlook for things getting better quickly is dim, despite forecasts of rain this week. Last month, California officials estimated the snowpack in the Sierra, a primary source of water for the state when it melts in the spring, at 61 percent of normal. On Friday, the State Department of Water Resources said it would deliver just 15 percent of its promised contracts, a level it was able to maintain only because of the recent spate of rain. “It’s pathetic,” said Lester A. Snow, the department’s director.
Lynette Wirth, a spokeswoman for the United States Bureau of Reclamation, said water levels in all federally managed reservoirs in California were well below normal, with “abysmal” carryover from the previous year.
“There’s been no meaningful precipitation since last March,” Ms. Wirth said.
Farmers, of course, are also dealing with issues unrelated to rain, including tight credit from banks and recent court decisions meant to protect fish that have limited the transfer of water through the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, which feeds snowmelt to farmbound canals. Many farmers refer to a “man-made drought” caused by restrictions.
At the same time, environmental groups say they also fear a range of potential problems, including depletion of the valley aquifer from well pumping, possible dust-bowl conditions in areas of large patches of fallow ground and concern about salmon and other species. “It’s a tough year for the environment, and people,” said Doug Obegi, a lawyer with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
George Soros’ $21 billion fund returned 8% last year, which is incredible not only in light of the global crisis, but also given his fund’s size. As you can see, Soros is now betting big on oil and agriculture, outside of the United States.
Soros Fund Management LLC bought 16 million shares of the Petrobras’ U.S. traded shares, bringing its stake to 1.45 percent, according to a filing yesterday with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. The New York-based firm increased its holdings in Potash by 2.6 million shares to 2 percent in the fourth quarter. Petrobras and Potash are now the firm’s two biggest reported U.S. stocks.
“As long as you see through the current crisis there are a few compelling reasons to buy,” Hernan Ladeuix, the head of oil and gas research at CLSA Ltd. in Singapore, said in an e-mail. “Oil prices should go up, probably strongly in coming years. Petrobras is the only large international company where you can have confidence that production can grow 5 percent per annum.”
The purchases made Soros the second-biggest shareholder in the U.S.-traded shares of Petrobras, Brazil’s state-controlled oil company. Petrobras preferred shares fell 5.4 percent in Sao Paulo yesterday, the most since Jan. 12, driven by a drop in oil prices to below $35 a barrel.
Potash, the biggest maker of crop nutrients, also fell by the most since Jan. 12, declining 7.4 percent yesterday. Soros Fund is the eighth-biggest holder in shares of the Saskatoon, Saskatchewan-based company.
Best Buy, Wal-Mart
Soros Fund added 9 million shares of Best Buy Co., bringing its stake to 2.3 percent of the electronics retailer. The firm also started a new position in Desarrolladora Homex SA de C.V., the Mexican homebuilder, bringing its holdings to 4.9 percent of U.S.-traded shares, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The firm bought 5 million shares of R.R. Donnelley & Sons Co.,North America’s largest printer, representing a 2.4 percent stake.
Soros’s hedge-fund firm sold 3 million shares of Wal-Mart Inc., bringing its stake in the discount retailer to 0.01 percent. The firm also sold all of its 2 million shares in Research In Motion Ltd., the maker of the Blackberry phone.
Money managers who oversee more than $100 million of equities or more must file, within 45 days of the end of each quarter, a Form 13F with the SEC that lists their U.S. exchange- traded stocks, options and convertible bonds. The filings don’t show non-U.S. securities or how much cash the firms hold.
Soros’s firm oversees $21 billion. Its Quantum Endowment Fund returned 8 percent last year. That compared with an average loss of 18 percent by hedge funds, according to data compiled by Hedge Fund Research Inc. of Chicago.
"Buffett agreed to buy a combined $750 million in debt from wallboard manufacturer USG Corp., motorcycle-maker Harley- Davidson Inc. and Sealed Air Corp., the maker of Bubble Wrap shipping products, in the past three months paying between 10 and 15 percent.
"Buffett also agreed in September and October to spend $8 billion on preferred shares of General Electric Co. and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. that pay 10 percent annual interest. This month, he agreed to buy convertible notes from Swiss Reinsurance Co. worth 3 billion Swiss francs ($2.6 billion) that pay 12 percent annually."
While Buffett’s bond investments might be mandated because he is using insurance float, it stands to reason that if he was overly concerned about very high rates of inflation, he would not be doing most of these transactions.
If Buffett was concerned about high inflation or a deteriorating dollar, he would simply do what he did before: forget about yield and invest in foreign currencies. For example, he could simply buy yen forwards or yen bonds if he thought the U.S. currency faced imminent destruction.
Granted, Buffett’s recent Swiss Re position has this dollar-hedge effect. But if Buffett expected hyperinflation, he would be making very different investments. He would be investing in hard assets or securities related to them.
With high domestic inflation, anything interest-bearing or financial is rat poison – yet Buffett has been investing heavily in dollar-based, fixed-income securities. Evidently he isn’t overly concerned about high inflation.
After thinking this morning about commodities and inflationary prospects, I watched a Jim Rogers interview from 1995, which I have included below. You will have to fast forward a bit, because he appears toward the end. Here are a few of his predictions from 1995:
“Next year and the year after, I don’t think we’re going to have good times in the American stock market.”
“Inflation is coming.”
“Commodity prices are going through the roof.”
Best country to invest in right now: “Iran.”
“Everything in life comes down to timing.”
Well, it looks as if Jim's timing was profoundly wrong.
In fact, much of this flies in the face of what he said in Hot Commodities, published a decade later, which was to the effect of “if you went through the 1990s and didn't touch shares in technology companies then you missed out on massive gains," essentially meaning that it was a mistake caused by not being open to new things.
But, as you can see, he was saying the exact same stuff back then as he is today. And he certainly wasn't talking about technology.
Anyone who continues saying that inflation will come or commodities will rise is bound to be proven right at some point. This not to single out Rogers as being wrong, but to emphasize my stance on how difficult it is to predict macro events – unless, that is, you only have one perennial prediction.
What history shows is that, aside from short-term macro shocks, the best asset class to own, by far, is stocks. And if you can buy those stocks at depressed prices or in periods of intense fear, then your total return can be magnified significantly.
Land, labor, capital and commodities are combined to create businesses that increase productivity. And while any one of those factors may become relatively attractive during a boom, owning excellent businesses – or fractional interests, called stocks – is the best investment over the long haul.
Keynes predicted that the great financial fortunes – paper fortunes, such as the Rothschilds in his day – would be destroyed by long-run inflation. Clearly, this has not happened.
Quite the contrary: the countries with the most developed financial systems have always been the most prosperous, whether the Medicis in Renaissance Italy, the Rothschilds in 19th-century London, or today's commanding skyscraper in Lower Manhattan that reads, simply: "85".
Thus, while the gloom and doom is persuasive nowadays, I remain highly skeptical that the world – financial or otherwise – is coming to an end. I lean more towards John Paulson's prediction that massive returns will accrue to buyers of solid, yet beaten-down financial stocks, as the smoke clears and we emerge from this crisis.
Of course, if people do “flock to global macro” as the article says, it will bankrupt the strategy.
A problem with macro over the long term is that it often comes to resemble rank gambling. Managers can make billions on each trade – or lose billions. They sell the strategy with historic bets like George Soros and sterling in 1992. But I am sure they fail to mention the innumerable historic blow-outs.
Also, the catch is that global macro is usually way more difficult than it has been lately. Over the past few years, the strategy was insanely simple: long commodities, long BRICs, short the dollar, short financials. These were one-way bets with every manager on one side of the trade.
The interesting thing is, each time this happens, everyone says that funds can’t move the market. The markets that these managers operate in are too big to be influenced – like crude oil, last summer. And then the market collapses and in hindsight we find that everyone was on one side of the trade and it created a bubble. It is important to maintain a healthy degree of skepticism with virtually everything along these lines.
A current example might be oil production and supply. I’ve heard many people make claims that production is down and supply is down, as if we’re back in 2003. So after a decade of skyrocketing prices and activity in the energy sector, production and supply are down?
This is a complete lie, no matter what the numbers say. The government or the central bank or whoever else will diligently present figures showing a certain case; but you’ll always do better using common sense. The people producing the data are backwards-looking by definition, and always way behind the curve.
Posts
