Risks: Recession/Cyclical, Depression/Structural - Weekly Blog # 909

 

 

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Risks: Recession/Cyclical, Depression/Structural

 

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

 

 

 

Fears

Recessions are a cyclical phenomenon, largely due to price and debt imbalances. They occur regularly within a ten-to-twenty-year period. Subsequent recoveries are usually as quick as recessions. Depressions are much rarer, leaving societies changed and altering the distribution of wealth and power.

 

Based on elapsed time the world is due a recession, which may have already started. Liz Ann Sonders of Charles Schwab points out that the US Government tracks the profitability of both public and private companies. In both the first and second quarters of 2025 earnings declined. She believes that when data for the third quarter comes out it will be below trend. This may be different than more publicly reported GDP results because the wholesale sector is absorbing the bulk of the costs of the tariffs which foreign exporters don’t pick up.

 

There are lots of private indicators of economic business troubles. One that has been around a long time is the production of boxes, which declined. A new one to me is the trading multiples on the sale of trucking companies, which I have been told dropped in the first half of this year. This is important because it not only indicates a decline in the demand for goods, but it is a signal that they are having difficulty getting experienced drivers. Many drivers are on expiring or expired visas, demonstrating the impact of tightening regulations on many business activities.

 

Below the surface other concerns are becoming more visible. One can’t avoid a discussion of what AI (Artificial Intelligence) will do for global industry and consumption. While a lot of money and talent is being spent under this rubric, there are still no identified profits or sales from its use. In a recent study by MIT, they found a low return on AI’s use. From an overall economic viewpoint, I have not seen a study showing if AI’s replacement of the work of people benefits society.

 

With relatively small changes in price and debt levels there will be a recovery from the recession. However, every couple of generations those responsible for curing recessions believe the quickest solution is structural, which society rejects over an extended period.

 

My Fear

We have all heard that history does not repeat, but rhymes. My fear is that we are generally following a pattern like the 1920s and early 1930s, which led to the Great Depression. (You’ll recognize the term depression more from the study of psychology than economics.)

 

The US has suffered numerous recessions, most of which were in the one-two year range. For a recession to become a depression there needs a force trying to fix how society and the economy work. Unfortunately, previous commanded decisions didn’t work and prolonged the impact of the recession. Over our history we have had four presidents who have tried to make meaningful changes to our society/economy: Andrew Jackson, Teddy Rosevelt, FDR, and Trump. Through executive orders and legislation these Presidents tried to change how people lived and worked but ran into significant opposition from the courts and elements of the business community. Because of the US’s market and military power, we have an impact on what other nations do. They either resist or go along with the strategy but will be impacted either way.

 

What should Investors do?

This advice is for long-term investors looking to make returns for future generations. Traders who invest to make relatively fast returns should follow the momentum of the markets, while investors should move slowly with portions of their wealth and responsibilities.

 

Each will be subject to the cyclical behavior of the market, world economy, and changes in needs. While a trader may guess correctly regarding cyclical moves and early structural changes, an investor should wait for some understanding of the major implications of the change and be willing to be wrong before being right.

 

Whatever discussions occur today, they will likely be different a year from now. Major differences will result from views on the 2028 election.

 

Odds

These are my analog thoughts that lack the precision of digital work, but that is the way I feel very early on Sunday morning:

• The odds of a recession before the next Presidential election appear to be 65%.
• In dealing with a recession, the odds of government converting it into a depression is 50%, although it may take longer. Human nature almost guarantees future recessions and depressions due to over expansion of debt and other unsustainable commitments.

 

As usual, please let me know what you are thinking.

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Tactical Headlines Show Strategic Clues - Weekly Blog # 908

Mike Lipper's Blog: Anticipation Pays; Deliveries May Not - Weekly Blog # 907

Mike Lipper's Blog: Selected and Casual Road Notes - Weekly Blog # 906

 

 

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.

Both Elections & Investments Seldom What They Seem - Weekly Blog # 860

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Both Elections & Investments

Seldom What They Seem

 

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

 

 

  

Gilbert & Sullivan nailed it when they titled one of their songs in H.M.S. Pinafore “Things are Seldom What they Seem”. This title should be attached to every article that discusses the investment implications of the next election and future elections. Currently, almost all the chatter is about the Presidential election, which also gets exclusive attention overseas. This is naive in the extreme for the following reasons:

1. Whoever is going to be sitting in the Oval Office will not likely be there for another term. Thus, they will likely have limited political power on Capitol Hill.
2. The House must start all tax and spending bills and both parties are split along ideological lines.
3. The Senate, with 6-year staggered terms, requires critical legislation to be passed by 60 votes. They wish to terminate the filibuster rule. Politically, the senate is even more divided than the house. Additionally, a number of senators are interested in having a seat in the White House and they typically have larger financial estates than members of the House.
4. Both political parties believe Washington should dictate what Americans purchase by using grants and tariffs. (Democrats favor “EVs” and labor union produced voters, while Republicans seem to favor tariffs. Our economic history shows that countries supporting consumer choice grow faster and sounder.)
5. With deep divisions on Capitol Hill and changing legislative leadership, including the chairs of committees on the Republican side, it is going to be difficult to get bills passed.
6. The role of the Supreme Court will be critical. The present Court believes it is responsible for determining when cases comply with the written Constitution. This Court decided that a prior court decision on Roe vs. Wade was unauthorized. The issue was not about abortion, but whether the “Warren Court” 50 years ago sanctioned abortion under the Constitution. The Founding Fathers limited the powers of the Federal government to those items specifically enumerated in the Constitution, leaving all other decisions to the individual states.   

 

Possible Peak Two Fridays Past

Some investors are more focused on their long-term investment responsibilities than political decisions. However, too many economists have become mathematicians and too many political scientists have become statisticians.

 

Some of the signs that all is not well:

1. AAII’s weekly sample survey of investor sentiment changed dramatically. Two weeks ago, there was 20 percentage point advantage in favor of the bulls for the next 6 months. In the most current week, this position shrank 7% points.
2. The weekly share volume on the NYSE declined 42,209 shares, while NASDAQ volume rose 3,034,261 shares. (Considering prices fell during this period, the increase in volume is bearish.)
3. Standard & Poor’s tracks 32 indices weekly and only 1 rose last week, by only 0.05%.
4. The underwriting of speculative bonds rose sharply in late September and thus far in October. The sharp increase in underwriting was well beyond the need to refinance existing debt. This suggests savvy speculative bond issuers see higher rates ahead when they need to sell more debt.

 

Question: How do you see interest rates in late 2025, 2026, and 2028?

 

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Melt-Up, Leaks, & Echoes of 1907 - Weekly Blog # 858

Mike Lipper's Blog: Stress Unfelt by the “Bulls”, Yet !! - Weekly Blog # 859

Mike Lipper's Blog: Mis-Interpreting News - Weekly Blog # 857

 

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.

Investors Focus on the Wrong Elements - Weekly Blog # 853

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Investors Focus on the Wrong Elements

 

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

 

 

 

Combing Mr. Buffett with Albert Einstein

Compound interest, the eighth wonder of the world, is wrongly attributed to Einstein according to the people at Caltech. Nevertheless, Warren Buffet stated, “He who understands it (compound interest) earns it. He who doesn’t pays it.” The better long-term investor understands it and uses it in drawing up his/her long-term strategy.

 

I have tended to use a long-term lens in my lifetime focus on mutual funds. My particular focus is the long-term, the ten-year record of the average performance of 30 equity fund indices for the last 10 years through August. Of the 30 only 7 had double digit returns, the highest being Health/Biotech which rose 15.67%. I also looked at the 25 largest stock mutual funds for 5 years, 17 of which produced double digit returns, with only one reaching the twenty percent level. It was Invesco QQQ Trust, which gained 21.30%.

 

This research reminds me of one pension plan a number of years ago which sold all its equities when the portfolio was up 20%. It was one of the best performing pension funds. Strange for me considering my background to suggest that superior performance could well be a signal to reduce investment. I say this knowing that every few years there is a period when one or more funds gain 100%. Strangely, none of these wonders makes the best performing list for the five or ten-year period.

The Media and Frequent Statements by Pundits

Traditionally, media outlets get more attention when the news is bad.   However, in covering the market and economy there is much space devoted to “happy news”. What seems particularly true is headline editors, correspondents, and allocators of space/minutes seem to share a single political view. It is occasionally worth reading to the end of an article where the other point of view gets some exposure. Operating margins for news distributors are under pressure, which has led to surveys where the number of people polled is only between 1,000 and 1,500. This might be okay, except that many people on the right don’t trust polls and media related agencies and thus do not participate in polls, often causing the prediction of incorrect election results.

 

What Should We Be Following

• Unlike the current situation in the US, many nations are seeing younger people move up. This is particularly true in the Middle East, Africa, and Asia.
• China is exporting surplus steel, which amounts to half of what they produce
• Our Presidential election on both sides exaggerates
• their commitment to integrity
• The pouring of money into small company start-ups will curtail the future of small business capital formation. The odds of repaying these loans and other bribes will probably be similar to the repayment of student debts. The unstated purpose of these programs is to hurt the families and friends of the would-be entrepreneur.

 

What elements are you watching to help make decisions about the two apparently unrelated games, equity markets and economy? How will global problems impact them?

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Lessons From Warren Buffett - Weekly Blog # 852

Mike Lipper's Blog: Understand Numbers Before Using - Weekly Blog # 851

Mike Lipper's Blog: The Strategic Art of Strategic Selling - Weekly Blog # 850

 

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.

Alternative Futures - Weekly Blog # 827

 

      

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Alternative Futures

 

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

   

 

       

Could the Future be Better?

While most stock indices are rising, most bond indices are falling.  Normally, fixed income investors are more risk aware than future oriented stock buyers and owners. Some near-term economic indices are rising, while public company managers are laying workers off. (Each worker is an investment of the company, which represents a reinvestment cost if eventually replaced.) Why is this happening when current sales are reasonably acceptable? To many businesspeople, their next planning period look bleak, despite what many political leaders say.

 

The current President is rushing into the 1930s FDR future. This has been magnified by an employment shortage in the prior engine of world trade growth, China. The general assumption in the US is that the current leadership won’t change.

 

 Will it be a Presidential election or one determining the leadership of the two Houses of Congress? According to Nikki Haley, 70% of voters are unhappy with the current candidates likely to lead their tickets. On day one in their next office, they will both be lame ducks. The Presidential term is 4 years, whereas the senate term is 6 years, and they often serve more than a single term. There is considerable evidence that a significant number of voters will decide to stay home on election day. Within each party the centrists tend to be the people not expected to vote. This will magnify the voting power of fringe voters. This was the reason the “State of the Union” speech was directed at tarnishing the other party, rather than at lauding the accomplishments of the party in power. (If this creates a “Nixon moment in the White House it could lead to both leading candidates being replaced. Kim Strassel of The Wall Street Journal said, “Both presumptive presidential nominees are so weak that they’d lose to virtually anyone else”)

Perhaps more important to the world is the statement by Xi, the paramount, but not sole leader of China. He is advocating “High Quality Development” = National Security, Political Stability, and Social Equality. With 90% of the population in the private sector, the level of employment is critical for stability. (China has a history of rebellions starting in the south, with some succeeding in changing the government. Their military posture is more defensive than offensive. However, their defense budget increased 7.2%, which does not include the 30-35% spending on science and space.

 

Other Items of Significance

• Fidelity International announced a layoff of 9% of its global workforce.
• AAII sample survey shows 51.7% bulls vs 21.8% bears, which is an extreme contrarian reading.

  

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: Bullish Chatter Leaves Out Useful Info - Weekly Blog # 826

Mike Lipper's Blog: Caution: This Time Is Different - Weekly Blog # 825

Mike Lipper's Blog: What Moves the Stock Market? - Weekly Blog # 824

 

 

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 – 2023

Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

Recognizing a Professional: Ratings vs Ranking - Weekly Blog # 811

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

 

Recognizing a Professional: Ratings vs Ranking

 

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

 

 

While we can’t know exactly whether someone is schooled in a subject or just pretending, we can presume a lot from their choice of words. In the world of investment statics there are several tribes of analysts that attempt to predict whether a fixed income instrument will go into bankruptcy. They summarize their learned judgements with letter grades, called ratings. These ratings do not give an opinion as to whether they are good investments, just whether they anticipate them entering bankruptcy. The history of the professional credit raters is pretty good, as bankruptcies are relatively few in number. While they give an opinion as to whether the instrument will enter bankruptcy, they do not indicate how much of the issued principle will be lost.

 

One unfortunate trait of inexperienced people is the use of a term from one subject in another. While the term may have some similarities, it is not identical and may not even have the same utility as the original. This is why I used performance ranks and not ratings when developing the practice of mutual fund analysis, using the performance array of mutual funds we tracked each week. This is where my analytical training kicked in.

 

I pity those who passed through the analytical profession and did not learn as I did at the racetrack. My experience instilled in me a strong aversion to losing money. Analysis at the track is similar to the popular method of selecting investments based on past performance. This approach relies on the belief in the repeatability of events and has led to the development of quantitative systems, both in the investment market and at the track. “Quantitative” investing has periodically been very popular in the investment market, buttressed by “ratings” which are meant to be predictive.

 

 I gained an advantage from my many discussions in the grandstands following each race, where some player complained about the failure of “the system” he/she was following. Because I did not like losing money, I paid attention to the complaints of the failed “systems”. What I discovered was these systems actually worked better than half the time for a period of time, but rarely more than 60-70% of the time.

 

Later in life I heard similar complaints from more senior analysts as the corporations they followed failed to deliver the expected performance. The standard complaint was that someone was lying. It took me a while to connect the similarity of their complaints with those I heard over the weekend at the track.

 

This realization led me to think about the process of predicting the future. Since no systematic thinking produced winners all the time, there must be mistakes in the math. As securities analysis is taught as an adjunct to math, or the certainty of law, the losses had to be a function of mechanical mathematic failure. It eventually occurred to me that it was not the process that failed, but the universe of variables being different than those utilized.

 

At the track, the things that could change were the jockey, the trainer, the exercise rider, what the horses were fed, what drugs were administered, or the competition. Each of these possible changes, and others, could and often did impact results. This is why I believe we should pay more attention to changes of people and their attitudes in the investment world. More so than believing in their statistical record.

 

This week was a good example of changes that largely invalidated the past record of the entire global financial sector. As an analyst, investor, and portfolio manager, I have always had an interest in financial services securities. Stock Exchanges have been at or near the center of the financial sector and thus were always of interest. There have been five Lipper brokerage firms that have been members of the New York Stock Exchange. (Never has a son or younger brother succeeded the founder, and consequently none extended to a second generation.)

 

In most commercially viable countries, there are stock exchanges. Considering all I know about these exchanges; none are making most of their money exchanging securities. At best, most make single digit returns on this revenue. This week I attended a capital markets conference of the 300-year-old London Stock Exchange. While it is interesting looking at their history or past performance, it is of no value predicting their future.

 

Unlike racehorses and most people, some companies can be rejuvenated into something quite different than their past history. In the case of the London Stock Exchange, it has grown into the London Stock Exchange Group (LSEG), primarily through a merger with a Thomson Reuters spin-off. (In 1998 Reuters purchased our fund data business. We and our accounts still own Thomson stock, which has a major position in LSEG.)

 

The spinoff included a number of unintegrated number-crunching entities, labeled Refinitive. It was a comfortable fit because the London Exchange had previously acquired a number of similar unintegrated and under-marketed numbers-companies. To this mix they added “expert” management from various financial and tech companies, including a cooperative agreement with Microsoft based on their plans and/or dreams.

 

The CEO believed he had identified all the problems that could delay them. The current management group is investing heavily in new products and services, including the marketing of them. It would not be difficult to improve on the record of its two major founders. LSEG deserves to be ranked highly in its present efforts. I will leave it to others to predict its future.

 

This Week’s Signs of Stagflation

Despite the media and others chanting Good News, there is increasing evidence that smart professionals see an approaching decline in market prices. Whether we are just in stagflation or entering a significant contraction will be determined later. However, it is worth noting the S&P 500 Equal Weighted Index is essentially flat year-to-date.

 

The following announcements have to do with future revenues. The companies making these statements are addressing the second of two measures of their health, their investment performance and the prospect of generating new business, largely from new customers.

• Manulife is laying off 250 employees in its Wealth and Asset Management functions. (Manulife is a Canadian Life Insurance company with significant Hong Kong sales.)
• Wells Fargo is laying off 50 Investment Bankers.
• Burberry issued a sales target warning.
• A 2^nd Hedge Fund is cutting 150 of its 1000 person staff.
• Jim Chanos is closing his short selling hedge fund. (He said the market is changing away from his style.)
• Amazon is cutting several hundred from its Alexa staff.
• Another observation noted in the weekly list of prices in the Weekend WSJ. Only 8% are down, including the US dollar -1.65%.
• Fitch is negative on the investment management sector in 2024.

 

Note From London

At private investment discussions in London during the week, locals were most concerned about the US Presidential election, with differing levels of pessimism. I had two comments.

1. It is incredible considering the size of the US population that the present apparent candidates are such a poor couple. The locals agreed.
2. Much more important to me is that we won’t know the Chairs of key committees until later next year. This is more important on the Republican side, as the Democrats are bound by seniority. According to the intelligent people I talk with, a split Congress is likely, suggesting not much meaningful Legislation will pass, except for emergencies during the first two years of the new term.

 

Share your views with me and let me know what you are watching in terms of markets and votes.

 

 

 

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

Mike Lipper's Blog: How to Find the Answer - Weekly Blog # 810

Mike Lipper's Blog: Preparing - Weekly Blog # 809

Mike Lipper's Blog: Indicators as Future Guides - Weekly Blog # 808

 

 

 

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 – 2023

Michael Lipper, CFA

 

All rights reserved.

 

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.

WHO YOU SELL TO DETERMINES WHAT YOU BUY AND WHEN? - Weekly Blog # 646

 

Mike Lipper’s Monday Morning Musings

WHO YOU SELL TO DETERMINES WHAT YOU BUY AND WHEN?

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

This week showed the value of reverse thinking. Most investors choose what to purchase based on the perceived characteristics of the investment. They choose when to make the purchase based primarily on their own needs or possibly a headline event. This thinking has not produced profits over the latest two weeks.

Who to Sell to?

Basic securities analysis textbooks assume that investors sell to investors that think like them, which is long-term, although the eventual buyer may be another company in a merger or acquisition. One of the nice things about life and markets is that each year brings new people wanting to invest. Each generation produces young people wishing to get rich quickly, who believe that making smart decisions and acting very quickly pulls off that trick. (Wouldn’t we all like to find Eldorado, the mythical gold mine.) 

While sheltering in place the youth discovered their brokerage firms allow them to trade on margin (borrowed money). Stocks and bonds cost too much money and move too slowly, so they quickly discovered put and call options. Options normally expire worthless or are sold, but they can require delivery or acceptance of the underlying shares. To protect the sellers of these options they buy or short the underlying shares. During the last two weeks the market has become aware that in aggregate these options plus some owned by a large Asian fund group is huge. This is one of the explanations of the two-tier market we have been experiencing. 

The first tier is about ten stocks including a couple of Asian companies. Through the end of August these stocks gained much more than +20%. The remaining stocks, the second tier, is still down a few percentage points year-to-date. Our intrepid youth has concentrated their attention on these tech leaders in the first tier. Options are written for various time periods, from a day to multiple years. Most institutions using options typically hold them for one or two months, but these youth are often in and out within two days. A complicating issue is the belief that the equity underlying these trades, on both the buy and sell side, could be as low as 7%. This in and of itself is causing rapid trading on the other side of these transactions. Short-term traders expect the other side of their trades to be similarly motivated by short-term views. During the last two weeks this has been the added increment to the market, adding to both volume and probably much more to volatility.

The Time Hurdles

Politics

As I’ve suggested in prior blogs, we have entered an emotional trading period which can last until mid-November. By the end we will have the initial results of the election. For forward-thinking investors who know history, the impact of the Presidential election will prove to be less important than who will be the chair and probable ranking member of various Congressional committees and possibly sub-committees. It will be this small group that puts words to the President’s wishes. Based on history, campaign slogans will either be totally disregarded or so modified that the results will be very different than what voters perceived on election day. 

By January, I believe both political parties will be splintered into different groups on many basic issues. Committee chairs will not automatically be able to send their wishes to the “floor” of their house without some support from the ranking (senior) opposition member of the committee. While all members always think of their next election, the defeated party will be focused on how to reverse the past election and how to improve their own chances for the next election. The ranking member has less ammunition than the chair, as they aren’t able to appoint sub-committee chairs. Additionally, members from the minority party will undoubtedly be split as to the reason for their side’s loss in the last election and will blame some of the remaining party members. Thus, they will not be easily led. Their immediate concern will be the 2022 mid-term and regaining the majority in 2024, where the two Presidential candidates will likely be new to those roles. 

COVID-19

We are likely to get frequent reports on the progress of vaccine trials and therapeutics, which are not as much in the news but possibly more important in terms of the number of people treated. Personally, I am very concerned with the execution of production and distribution of these lifesaving or at least life altering medicines. These are very large tasks that frequently run into problems. 

Other News Elements Before 2021

• BREXIT + UK Economic Recovery Faster than Continent
• Some rising commodity prices affecting some consumer prices

Market Indicators

• Very few fund investment categories rose this week - precious metals, agricultural commodities, Japanese and European equities
• NASDAQ fell -11% from its all-time high
• Dow Theory has a buy signal (often late, but sometimes early)
• AAII survey sample increasingly bearish
• Used car prices rising

What Should Investors Do?

Traders should trade, but remember, they want to finish with cash in the end. Investors should sit through this emotional trading period unless the market moves 20% either way. If a specific issue has some unexpected news causing reinterpretation of the situation, perhaps some change might be warranted. In general, sound investors with good portfolios and not too much cash should use a 20% market gain to add to reserves. Investors should use a 20% market drop to look for new bargains, which will benefit quickly if the market adapts to new strategies. (One might consider long-term producers or transporters of natural gas, or companies whose revenues are tied to market prices.) 

  

 

     

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

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2020/09/turning-point-or-bump-weekly-blog-645.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2020/08/caution-ahead-emotional-turns-likely.html

https://mikelipper.blogspot.com/2020/08/mike-lippers-monday-morning-musings_23.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 - 2020

A. Michael Lipper, CFA

All rights reserved

Contact author for limited redistribution permission.