Was it the week that wasn’t? - Weekly Blog # 917

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Was it the week that wasn’t?

 

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

 

 

 

Does 3 ½ US Trading Days make a week?

The bullish media and “street” pundits were thrilled that the 3½ day trading week restored early November losses to the popular stock averages, although they were disappointed the rise did not breakthrough to new highs. Looking at the results, they resembled a week from a younger bull market.

 

Reality may have been the problem

At least one analyst calculated that if you eliminated all “AI” related activity since 2019 “the market” is probably down. This suggests that since 2019 we have experienced a slowly declining bear market. The Conference Board’s measure of confidence recently dropped to 88.7%, which was more than the expected reading of 93% and the prior reading of 95.5%. HP, the old equipment producer part of Hewlett Packard, joined many other large employers in announcing expectations of a 10% job cut. The American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) sample survey for the last three weeks reported bullish projections of 32.0%, 32.6% and 31.6%, respectively for the next six-months. Their bearish projections remained in the 40-49% range.

 

Regular subscribers to these blogs have learned of my concerns about the declining quality of balance sheets, a warning sign of economic turmoil. One measure of this is the much larger growth in volume on the NASDAQ vs. the “Big Board”. In the short Friday trading session, the decline in volume on the NASDAQ was twice as large as the percentage decline on the NYSE.

 

Two Causes of Economic Turmoil

As with the runup to the 1929 crash, the Roaring Twenties led to overconfidence (AI?) and unsound leverage (Private Capital?). The organizational hollowing out is causing an increase in execution risk. Governments, universities, businesses, and families reacting to increasing financial strain are looking to improve efficiencies. Efficiency, not effectiveness, is measured by output vs input. Many have assigned revenues or other outputs to those at both the top and bottom of the production ladder. The people in the middle, mostly supervisors/middle management, have not been credited with the output assigned to those at the top and bottom and have been reduced or eliminated entirely. One glaring example is the federal government, although this trait is found throughout society. The President has had difficulty getting many of his actions approved by the courts. In numerous cases there was insufficient careful staff work, which would have phrased efforts better or would have raised internal discussion instead of simple loyally in attempting to execute flawed orders. This is a pattern exhibited in other organizations.

 

Thoughts?  

 

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Recession/Depression Risk Assumptions - Weekly Blog # 916

Mike Lipper's Blog: Risks Are Rising Thru the Clouds - Weekly Blog # 915

Mike Lipper's Blog: The Inevitable Recession - Weekly Blog # 914

 

 

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.

 

Slow Moving in a Fog - Weekly Blog # 888

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Slow Moving in a Fog

 

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

 

                             

 

Weather Predictor’s Real Function

One should pity the role of weather predictors who must often predict changes in the weather, either by hour, day, week, month, or year. One or more of their outputs are frequently wrong because something changes. As a professional chartered financial analyst (CFA) I am both grateful and sympathetic to their plight.

 

The only thing they can be confident of is making securities analysts look good, having a somewhat worse prediction record than the analysts. The primary reason they are wrong is that something changes. As both surviving analysts and politicians are prone to say, when the facts change, my views change.

 

To safeguard my self-confidence, I rely on a weather condition. A fog has descended on the economic and securities playing fields. We will be in such a situation this week and looking forward to the future. Since managing and owning a portfolio, “facts/sentiments” change every minute, hour, day, week, month, or year. It is more like navigating a vessel than a piece of statutory. Dangerous risks in a fog are unidentified shoals or obstacles, as well as warning elements which occur randomly.

 

Friendly Signals

• Many Chinese believe that 888 is a lucky sign of the future.
• The American Association of Individual Investors (AAII) latest weekly sample survey showed a decline in bearish readings and an increase in bullish readings.
• 54% of the weekly readings of the prices of indices, currencies, commodities, and ETFs in the WSJ were higher.
• Unusual trading volume on Friday was the highest of the week.

Warning Signals

• The Financial Times noted that “Institutional Money Managers are trimming US exposure...”
• The US Federal Government is expected to cut-back “Watchdogs at the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency and the Securities and Exchange Commission.” (Beneath the surface, there appears to be concerns about the soundness of small banks and private debt instruments.)

 

Mixed Messages

When a stock price drops about 1% following a corporate announcement after it was expected to rise, either the expectation was wrong, or some didn’t understand the message. This is particularly true when the stock and announcer are both among the best practical educators in the investment world. I am referring to the drop in the price of Berkshire Hathaway* after Warren Buffett announced his intention to ask the Board to approve his resignation as CEO, effective year-end.

*Berkshire Hathaway is held in both client and personal accounts and is the largest holding in some of the later accounts.

 

Warren Buffett has said for years that the stock price would likely rise after he retired, and I shared his views for a couple of reasons. First, his retirement would eventually happen and second that he was running the company for the heirs of the shareholders. With that in mind, he ran the company in a low-risk fashion. In many, but not all ways, Berkshire was a trust account for the shareholders’ heirs.

 

His long-term friend and vice-chair, the late Charlie Munger, taught him not to buy cheap stocks on a price basis, but good companies at fair prices. Charlie called Warren a learning machine because he learned every day, particularly from losses. This reinforced the teaching of Professor David Dodd at Columbia, who taught the Securities Analysis course based on his experience in the Depression. This was perfectly appropriate for the times, and he was still focused that way in the mid-1950s when I took his course.

 

The course was essentially an accounting course using financial statements. It took me a number of years to learn the other key lesson, the business analysis of the issuer. This knowledge was one of Charlie Munger’s contributions to Warren. After Charlie passed a few days before his hundredth birthday, the likelihood of Warren’s own retirement became more likely.

 

His retirement became possible with the appointment of Greg Able, who is much more of an operating manager than a securities manager, which Berkshire neglected in my opinion. Recent sellers of the stock were likely worshipers of “Mr. Buffett” or possibly the heirs of long-term holders who now felt free to capture the assets for their own needs rather than wait for the passing of their relatives. They have probably never read anything about Berkshire’s investment thinking. Thus, I do not believe they are informed sellers.

 

How do you see things?

 

 

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Significant Messages: Warren Buffett to Step Down by End of Year, Other Berkshire Insights, and Tariffs won't deliver - Weekly Blog # 887

Mike Lipper's Blog: A Contrarian Starting to Worry - Weekly Blog # 886

Mike Lipper's Blog: Generally Good Holy Week + Future Clues - Weekly Blog # 885

 

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.

 

Separating: Present, Renewals, & Fulfilment - Weekly Blog # 879

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Separating: Present, Renewals, & Fulfilment

 

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

 

 

 

 First Priority

Determining the motivation of the client and the account’s heirs is key to understanding the performance of most investment accounts. When asking the real investment account decision-maker about the driving motivation, it is often singular even though multiple other motivations are listed. (It often takes many discussions to reach the effective truth. Over time and changing situations the driving motivations may change.)

 

With most individuals, critical decisions are based on selected discussions with highly respected individuals, which may change over time due to changing circumstances. Most often these individual decision advisers are not revealed to the “hired hands” of the portfolio manager. All too often the unofficial managers express their opinions based on their own experience, which may have little relevance to the long-term needs of the account. These accounts are effectively managed by people known and unknown to the professional manager. Thus, the crucial job for the professional is to communicate effectively with those having meaningful influence on the account. Not an easy job.

 

The Second Motivation

The owner of the account should understand that there is a second motivation operating in practically all situations. The prime motivation of the investment manager is to continue the relationship with the present controller of the account, which includes the periodic renewal of the relationship. The relationship rests primarily on the communication skills of the manager in reaching the expected satisfaction level. This is a two-part job, where the first task is setting and updating expectations. The second task is delivering the expected return and communicating the proper expectation. This is again a two-fold job, with the first task satisfying the adjusted needs of the account in absolute return terms. The next part is where many managers fall down, the artform of selecting appropriate comparisons. This is where my biases enter. I do not believe a managed account should be compared to a list of securities selected by a manager. It should instead be compared to a fund portfolio with real expenses and diversification requirements, similar to the account itself.

 

The Most Important Motivation

Most of the money in the United States is managed directly or indirectly for “retirement needs”, which has lengthened over time. “Retirement” can include the institutional needs of academic, medical, and cultural institutions. What makes these accounts challenging is the receipt of money near term to meet future needs, which may not be well-defined in the current period.

 

Currently, the biggest hurdle in managing long-term money is the new economic/financial situation, which is different from the recent past. Most of the time change moves relatively slowly, which allows the participants time to adjust their actions to the pace of change. However, there are some brief periods of even more rapid change where it is difficult to catch up and adjust to the radical changes. I believe we have entered such a period and expect to have more difficulty predicting the future. For a period, we will likely be out of step with the fundamental changes likely to occur.

 

What is Changing?

The following elements of change surfaced last week.

• Weekly S&P sector performance: S&P Finance +2.80% vs -4.01% for S&P Tech.
• Goldman Sachs will soon cut 3-5% of its Vice Presidents.
• Schroders will lay off 200 employees to refocus and improve profit margins. They will also cut their Executive Committee by half, which is 44% family owned.
• There are $3 trillion ageing and unsold private equity deals. (Retail investors are taking risks in Private Equity that exceed public investing protections.)
• The US has not seen so much restructuring in the Federal Government, Corporations, Energy, and Retail since the Depression.
• The AAII weekly sample survey’s 6-month bullish prediction is now 19.3% vs 57.3%. (The lowest I have seen, which is often wrong at turning points)
• Global financial communities are developing new instruments that can be leveraged.
• With copper and coffee commodity prices going up, I am not surprised the Fed is holding off on lowering interest rates.
• There is probably more to the reluctance in naming a bank supervisor than we know.

 

We know that history does not repeat (exactly), but it does rhyme. There is an incomplete comparison one could make with the 1930s, but I hope it isn’t so.

 

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Reality is Different than Economic/Financial Models - Weekly Blog # 878

Mike Lipper's Blog: Four Lessons Discussed - Weekly Blog # 877

Mike Lipper's Blog: Recognizing Change as it Happens - Weekly Blog # 876

 

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.