Showing posts with label Chairman Powell. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chairman Powell. Show all posts

Sunday, July 27, 2025

Melt Up Not Convincing - Weekly Blog # 899

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Melt Up Not Convincing

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

 

 

Contrary Evidence Also Not Convincing

 

Low Transaction Volume, High Chatter

 

Short-Term Implications

 

  1. NASDAQ is breaking up. Up volume is leading, while more prices are down than up?
  2. Industrial commodity prices rose during the week, 115.8 vs 114.98 the prior week according to ECRI.
  3. AAII weekly bullish outlook is declining, 36.8%, 39.3%, and 41.4% over the last 3 weeks.
  4. WSJ weekly down prices seem strange. The worst was Natural Gas -12.71%, but the next worst was a -2.82% negative return. This suggests there were few negative prices. Natural Gas prices remained volatile, being up +7.57% the prior week.

 

Possible Longer-Term Implications

  1. Trump used construction costs for an already constructed Federal Reserve building to raise the costs of the new headquarters. Chairman Powell spotted it. Assume for the moment this was a honest mistake, it suggests that the President’s staff is lacking something. There have been similar mistakes, some of which were part of the reason the courts ruled against various executive orders.
  2. Charley Ellis’ column on David Swensen in the Financial Times listed some of the reasons for Yale’s outstanding long-term record. A long-term focus meant less liquidity was needed and analysis went beyond financial statements to management policies, and well-placed alumni which wasn’t mentioned. I tried to follow his approach.
  3. Most US Presidents have focused on managing the government and society as it was when they came into office. President Trump is the fourth president to make fundamental changes. (The others were Jackson, Teddy Roosevelt, and FDR.) Along with the other activists Presidents, the current occupant of The White House wishes to proscribe new ways of thinking to change our behavior. This is what our founders feared, the tyranny of the majority over the minority. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights have built in checks and balances. Consequently, I believe we are going to see more court actions for the rest of this term.

 

Implications?

I believe it’s going to be increasingly difficult to develop a long-term investment policy as we go through a period of attempted structural change.

 

What do you think?

 

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: It May Be Early - Weekly Blog # 898

Mike Lipper's Blog: Misperceptions: Contrarian & Other Viewpoints: Majority vs Minority - Weekly Blog # 897

Mike Lipper's Blog: Expectations: 3rd 20%+ Gain - Stagflation - Weekly Blog # 896



 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2024

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Sunday, April 6, 2025

Short Term Rally Expected + Long Term Odds - Weekly Blog # 883

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Short Term Rally Expected + Long Term Odds

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018

 

                             

 

Short-Term Rally

Focusing exclusively on short-term data suggests that when there is a strong broad market trend in one direction for an extended time, a countertrend is likely to surprise proponents of the longer primary trend. That is what I am expecting in the days and possibly weeks ahead, a somewhat explosive rise in the general market indices. Below are some indicators of why an explosive rise is likely:

  • On Friday, 90.5% of the stocks on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) fell in price. Typically, when 90% of a universe goes in one direction, it is close to being exhausted.
  • In looking at the daily price charts of both the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) and the Dow Jones Transportation Average, from their historic peaks to Friday’s close they have declined enough from their historic high points to conclude that the last rise has been fully discounted.
  • A third set of indicators is the weekly sample survey from the American Association of Individual Investors (AAII). The sample survey divides the views for the market six months from the current date into bullish, bearish, and neutral. In an idealized state one would think approximately one-third of the sample would fall into each category, although that is likely not the case since it is an audience of stock owners. Thus, the “normal” vote favors a bullish view. Recently, the survey showed a contrarian result in favor of the bears and two weeks ago the split was almost 2 to1, 59.2% bearish and 27.4% bullish. This week the ratio was much closer to 3 to1, 21.8% bullish and 61.9% bearish). In theory the AAII survey’s audience is made up of retail investors who have a good long-term record of guessing right, but not at turning points. Perhaps this time the public is in-line with the professionals.

 

When discussing a possible rally with people, I urged them to use the opportunity to reposition their portfolio for a new bull market, not the old one that may already have concluded in 2024.

 

Putting Tariffs in Perspective

While not perfect as a future model, it may be useful to compare the current situation with the early 1930s. The US was in the early stages of a “normal” cyclical recession triggered by the creation of too much debt.

Coming out of WWI there were constraints on the economy, men were returning to the workforce, the farm belt was producing food for a starving world, and Russia was having extreme economic problems. Additionally, the banking community was pushing out debt to support the expansion of the 1920s, including margin loans from Wall Street.

 

As the rest of the world was getting back on its feet it was better able to feed itself, which reduced the price of food produced by US farmers. Many started to leave the farm-belt, with young men streaming into factories as small farms merged into larger ones. They were increasingly replaced by machines, which were sold to farmers on debt carried by the local small farm banks. The farmers, their dealers, and their banks, all needed to be recapitalized. They appealed to their politicians who passed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, which President Herbert Hoover reluctantly signed. Unfortunately, numerous other countries followed our lead, which led to a world-wide recession.

 

Why is this important to us?

There is an uncomfortable parallel with our situation today. We have permitted or encouraged prices to rise for eggs, meat, and milk, among other commodities. In other words, we have inflated our expenses. While not often aligned, Chairman Powell and Jaime Dimon are both very concerned. Interestingly, Jaime Dimon is a corporate descendant of J.P. Morgan. In 1907, in an attempt to head off a major crash, JP Morgan locked the leading bankers in his library and refused to let them out until they individually agreed to recapitalize the failing Trust companies.

 

What is the parallel to what we may be facing today? When FDR became the President in March of 1933, with his “brain trust” he like Trump was dealing with a cyclical recession which was not his fault. Somewhat like FDR, Trump appears to be turning a cyclical recession into a structural recession, using tariffs as the tool.

 

What Happens Now?

I don’t know, and I believe President Trump himself does not know. He knows what he wants to happen, but he doesn’t know whether he has enough Republican support to make it happen. The following is a possible path to what will follow:

  1. The first not fully completed step, the announcement which focused on the rate of the proposed tariffs. President Trump is aware that there are at least two other critical issues that impact world trade; the regulations that deal with the negotiation of the size and shape of trade and payments, and secondly the price level of the currencies involved.
  2. The next phase is the public or private position of the various countries.
  3. Is the President really after the negotiation, which he feels is his skill set?
  4. Implementation of the trade agreement. How will any of the agreements really work and be enforced. (This is the topic I am most concerned about as it takes skilled players to make it work. We have not seen many of these.)
  5. Cheating is to be expected. How will it be handled?
  6. The new or refurbished plants will eventually produce excess capacity.
  7. If the dream becomes the world we live in, will it be a less artificial world than we live in today? Can we handle it?
  8. The time to complete the process, if it fails, will be short. The Smoot Hawley Tariff ended three years after its passage. If the process succeeds, it is likely to take many years and different administrations.

 

I would appreciate your thoughts    

 

 

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

Mike Lipper's Blog: Increase in Bearish News is Long-Term Bullish - Weekly Blog # 882

Mike Lipper's Blog: Odds Favor A Recession Followed Up by the Market - Weekly Blog # 881

Mike Lipper's Blog: “Hide & Seek” - Weekly Blog # 880



 

Did someone forward you this blog?

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 – 2024

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Sunday, August 28, 2022

4%, 5%+, Changes, Disruptions, Faulty # # - Weekly blog # 748

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

4%, 5%+, Changes, Disruptions, Faulty # #

 

Editors: Frank Harrison 1997-2018, Hylton Phillips-Page 2018 –

    

 


Particularly Difficult to Invest 

Pundits have an advantage over real investors. They eliminate any factors contrary to their proclamations. I don’t have that capability in deliberating how to invest for the multiple futures faced by my accountsThe somewhat obtuse title of this blog is a shorthand list of my concerns.  

 

4% 

4% is my conclusion after listening intently to Chairman Powell’s less than 9-minute speech concerning the Federal Reserve Board’s direction. While it did not reveal much new, it reinforced earlier comments made at the last press conference. It reaffirmed my belief that the minimum interest rate that should be expected is 4%. My belief is anchored in a co-incidence. Most money in the market is invested to meet retirement and estate needs. Long-term research suggests annual withdrawals from these funds should be 4%, which implies leaving the on average basic capital intact after inflation and taxes. If that is the goal for both private funds and social security payments, it requires capital growing at least 4%. This 4% aspiration is higher than the current return earned by Social Security and other government funds. Thus, the basic requirement for a sound economy is 4% growth. 

 

The drop in stock prices on Friday was probably due to expectations the Fed would show signs of “pivoting” toward lower interest rates. Investors should not let wishes drive expectations! 

 


5%+ 

Reported general US inflation is running at 8% or more. Chairman Powell and other Fed leaders have indicated the appropriate Fed interest rate should be sufficiently above the inflation rate to assure consumers and others in the market that rising inflation won’t be a future problem. 

 

The current focus of the Fed and others in government is the belief that they can only accomplish their goal by reducing aggregate demand. This is what is taught at most universities. Advocates of this view have little if any experience in the commercial world. They believe in dropping the level of the water when a tall vessel approaches a low hanging bridge. I and others in the commercial world believe the bridge should be raised, probably permanently. 

 

In terms of current US inflation, the current administration is lowering the water. Energy is probably the largest single contributor to inflation around the world, yet the US government is curtailing its availability. Other constraints placed by the organs of government on a productive economy are various regulations. Without changes, odds are low the US will see inflation less than 5%, and it may be well above. 

 

There is a good chance that assets other than US currencies will appreciate when the Russian-Ukraine war ends and/or when the Chinese government is successful in growing its economy again. Thus, it is appropriate to assume the US dollar will decline in value at some point. Goods and services purchased from overseas will then be priced higher, adding to our inflation. 

 


Changes 

There are likely political power changes coming to the US from both the mid-term and presidential elections 

 

In the current recessionary environment, we are seeing various senior portfolio management and asset management leadership changes. Many corporate boards of directors are unwilling to continue with their current top management, or even continue to allow their degree of independence. (This could be an early gift to slow moving “value” stocks.)  

 


Disruptions 

One influencer of goods inflation is inflation in the service sector. Customers in supermarkets and malls have changed their buying habits to get more value and less fashion from their purchases. This change has been noted by producers of consumer goods. They have reduced advertising support for some fashionable top-line merchandise. 

 

The reduced support has already led to lower expected revenues for the big five advertising agencies. Broadcasting networks are in turn worried about revenues from these advertisers. At least one network is considering dropping an hour from its prime-time programs. I suspect competition from cable and streaming channels is also chipping away at network audiences. 

 

Another disruption is life insurance sales being down from peak-levels during the pandemic.  

 

A final disruption is the value of real estate. Commercial real estate is carried as an asset on corporate balance sheets. For the most part it is carried at purchase price less “depreciation”. This gets to the heart of the problem. Accountants and asset owners don’t like being sued for inaccurate financial statements. Consequently, they carry their assets at costs less amortization of their purchase prices unless there is a rare contrary price available. 

 

Take an office building costing $1 million being “depreciated” $25,000 each year, straight line. At the mid-point of its theoretical life the property value would be listed as $500,000. The accounting rules would not permit raising the carrying value to $750,000 if a comparable property was sold at that level. Nor would it drop that valuation to $600,000, a drop of 20% if there was a lower priced sale later. Consequently, the owner would carry the building at $500,000 that year. Thus, there is a $100,000 “hidden value” that many “value investors” prize. 

 

Now, bringing the situation up to date. The present tenants have indicated that they only need 25% of their space due to work from home syndrome. They threaten that they will move out unless the rent is adjusted to their needs. If this were to happen in the midpoint year, the real value of the building might be $150,000, (25% of $600,000 if that price is still accurate.) The problem for an uninformed value investor is that this price is considerably below what the investor thought. 

 


Conclusion: 

These are uncertain times. While some of the uncertainties will be solved, they will not be solved at today’s prices. So prudent investors should move cautiously and probably divide their transactions into parcels for periodic transactions. They should not try to pick a bottom or jump on a sharply rising trend. 



If you have different views, please share.  

  

 

Did you miss my blog last week? Click here to read.

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2022/08/mikelippers-monday-morning-musings.html

 

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2022/08/time-to-prune-weekly-blog-746.htm

 

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2022/07/time-to-be-contrary-weekly-blog-741.html


 

Did someone forward you this blog? 

To receive Mike Lipper’s Blog each Monday morning, please subscribe by emailing me directly at AML@Lipperadvising.com

 

Copyright © 2008 - 2022

 

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.