Commodity prices - what drives them?
Cancerous growth of money!
Is capital destruction reasonable solution?
Let me first categorically state that I am pro-globalisation. Recently there is a careful weighing of pros and cons of globalisation. You can read Tyler Cowen, Mark Thoma and Brad Delong on this. I have a few points to add to this:
Globalisation as envisaged in theory and the practial globalisation that we are experiencing are two different animals. The first is the goal where the world economic system intends to move to. The second is represents a deviation, an intermediate stage, from the prior status (pre-globalised industrialsation) towards our goal of true globalisation. Let me hypothesize what differences we have.
Therefore, the current state has the pros and cons mixed up. The matter needs more debate and in-depth analysis. Today was just a welcome start!
Update:
Now here is the explanation and analysis of the Fed President Jeffrey Lacker's speech by Yves Smith. This is one of the reason why I am a fan of Yves Smith!
Thats why not much to add from my side. Here is the link: naked capitalism: Should the Fed Be Independent?
It would be wonderful to know what Yves Smith and others think on this one. Let me know what you think about this one.
"Despite the recent dollar decline, America’s trading partners still have large trade surpluses. ... So the more competitive dollar is not causing fundamental trade problems for America’s trading partners."
Whoa! While I agree that US dollar needs to correct itself to more competitive levels, the above statement is discomforting. As Alex mentioned if dollar decline was for real US trade deficit should have increased. Thats not happened because "almost" all trading partners have currencies pegged (overtly or covertly) to the dollar. Hence dollar decline takes all this basket of currencies lower.The "almost" in above statement refers to oil! Oil is delinking from USD denomination. Other commodities are catching onto this idea. And all US trade partners need oil and commodities. As oil and key commodities move relative to dollar you will see more pain for US and trading partners, creating an incentive to stem the currency depreciation.Now comes the main dilemma - as these countries move away from dollar peg - their reserve start losing value. At the least $ 1.5 trillion is held in reserves by major trading partners - even a percentage point here makes quite a big contribution to their GDP - so its like rock and hard place situation.This, to my mind, will put a hell lot more downward pressure on the dollar than has ever seen before!Though this raises US mfg competitiveness but hits Europe hard in their face. The trading partners' might face crises - and lets hope its just monetary and not a social unrest. (thats why you have something called country risk)To my mind a stronger USD easing out is much better way out of current mess. Funnily US has an incentive/self interest to devalue the dollar - but doing so will mean push everyone into a deep downward spiral.RD
There are reasons to believe that "investor demand" is driving asset prices through the roof. The "investor" crowd dynamics and the wealth they bring to this party may be acting as a self-reinforcing mechanisms at the core of this increase. If this party has gone on too far then we are in for trouble. A really big trouble.
Invested - appreciated - invested more!
This cycle has continued in almost every globalized economy. The increasing returns from the initial run of this cycle did bring in lot of new investors. The cycle, luckily, kept going enriching investor class substantially. This brought into "investment focus" various "asset classes" - like commodities, real estate, currencies etc. The cycle kept turning till about June 2007.
The last buyer - Where art thou?
Typically all investments terminate with end-user or what we can call the last buyer. Road investment look for the car /truck driver - mall investments look for the shopper - and houses look for the person wanting to stay.
The real estate sector, typically, is the first to look for last buyer. But there we had some interesting toxic concoction brewing - with easy credit flowing into the sector. As the sub-prime crises unfolded last year - the real estate sector finally started looking for the last buyer. It didn't find any.
The reality dawned upon the masses that "real estate" was priced too high for the real buyer. Based on current prices the real buyers will have to slog for many years before they can make any significant impact as "last buyers".
This is probably true for all "asset classes". Real estate (residential and commercial), stocks, bonds, non-agri commodities, derivatives across the globe are at the vortex of this hurricane. These asset classes have experienced tremendous upward force. The asset classes at the periphery - agri-commodities, are beginning to feel the force putting upward pressure on inflation - particularly food prices.
A Quick conclusion
If the hypotheses is true we are in for a particularly long painful period.
Even most powerful hurricane drops the things it throws in the air. So will prices drop - in real terms - either through inflation shooting up making this new wealth worthless or prices will deflate to a pain-point.
The most dramatic inflection point will come, if at all, within two quarters where large money will take sides on either possibilities - anticipating a killing. Let us brace for impact.
Meanwhile - we will look at what may have caused this in a little more details - and like always only hypotheses.
The long-term implications of high US personal (or family) debt may be worse than we anticipate. Various forecasts, discounting economic outputs from "back-to-normal" scenario 2-4 years in the future, may not have accounted for the problem correctly.
Debt stick on - even increases in bad times
Debt, much unlike losses, has an uncanny ability to stick - tying up future cash-flows for years, thereby constraining future consumption. Debt sticks on through job-losses, bankruptcies. In fact it increases - either in form of accumulated interest or future interest rates or loan availability. At least in India, where we do not have personal bankruptcies, this created systemic household poverty for generations. Drawing parallels from that, I believe, the time it will take to get the balance-sheets of US families to saner level of gearing might be much longer. Further more, for US, this exercise needs to be undertaken in/around recession years. Though it may not be generations, like in developing India, but it cannot be simply 2-4 years we anticipate.
Debt cause social pain
Corporate turnaround experts understand the kind of discipline and dispassionate execution it requires just to make small improvements. And it is still easier with a "company" than with household expenditures. Household cannot cut jobs and costs the way corporates can. Governments in progressive countries, like in US, tend to intervene with additional spending on social support - particularly education and healthcare. That spells problem for US.
In sum
We need to understand for median household debt what would be a good time frame get back in shape. We also need to understand the costs required to get them back in shape. The real future outcomes will lie hidden in these details.
As soon as we correctly value and discount these costs, the bearish-ness will vanish. Bulls don't like bullshit about recovery. Show us a real recovery and it's cost and we will "bear" it all the way into a bull run!
In my last post, I mentioned that wealth concentration exposed the financial systems to risks. The risk is compounded by inherent weakness of the financial system that were not designed to accommodate. These systems are weak and plagued by complicated issues.
Popular, informed expert opinion is also weighing in on this shortcoming.
You can read Michael J. Panzner
in the modern global financial system, where many participants are either unregulated or are monitored by a patchwork of country or sector-specific regulatory overseers, chances are that a derivatives-related catastrophe will see a similar lack of coordination that will produce a far more devastating outcome than if it was a purely domestic affair.
It is one thing for a central banker to summon the heads of various financial firms into a room to sort out the mess at hedge fund LTCM, as the New York Federal Reserve chief reportedly did in 1998. Despite the fact that the Fed had limited statutory authority in the matter, it is not hard to see why none of those who were asked to attend turned down the "invitation."
However, if a derivatives time-bomb is set off by the failure of a large London-based hedge fund, will a banker in the Cayman Islands, an investor in Japan, an insurer in Germany, and a regulator in France feel similarly inclined to respond, or even to take the lead? That is assuming, of course, that those affected even understand what is going on or why it may be relevant to their own interests. Overall, there appears to be little, if any strategy in place for dealing with cross-border financial upheaval.
And Marshall Jevons linking to Davos
At the World Economic Forum in Davos, Mr Knight said the “major challenge” for regulators was the “the Balkanisation of regulation – fragmented across market segments, across national jurisdictions and yet we want to have a global financial system”.
And Dani Rodrick
How do you deal with capital flows when they are so prone to boom-and-bust cycles and generate (roughly once a decade) financial crashes with painful economic consequences? The mainstream answer is that you do not regulate capital flows directly--through capital controls such as financial transactions taxes or deposit requirements--but you rely instead on prudential regulation of financial intermediaries. The best way to avoid crashes, this argument goes, is not to "throw sand in the wheels of international finance" (as Tobin famously put it), but to make sure that intermediaries do not take excessive risks.
In Sum...
A system so designed will be prone to momentum effects. The momentum is aggravated by wealth concentration. International finance needs to evolve beyond the free capital movement to counter this risk. A system of seamless regulatory response needs to be developed. Hopefully the thinkers at Davos will lay the first stone of a potent globalized interlinked system.
The world markets have taken a beating for a few trading sessions. We are all confounded by the speed, breadth and uniformity in the correction. As usual, yours truly already expressed it long ago (!) with loads of hypotheses and un-correlated facts. So lets start looking at one out of those - my favourite - Wealth Concentration!
When world embraced capitalism, it embraced, as Milton Friedman puts it, equality of opportunity and freedom of choice. It also embraced, as Karl Marx anticipated, income inequality and therefore poverty. Poverty, the product of capitalism, is a real circumstance. Since capitalism also offers everyone a fair chance to rise above his circumstance and create wealth, there is not much discord with this arrangement. In fact, coupled with an enabling infrastructure provided by a democratic government, this represents one of the fairest civil structures yet created.
So why do some people remain condemned to poverty? To understand this, we need to understand poverty a little bit better.
Transient Poverty Vs Structural Poverty
Poverty, essentially (i.e. theoretically), is transient. In a stable, fair capitalist economy, there is a certain amount of population that always remains at the bottom - below the poverty threshold - of the income pyramid. By labour and enterprise, this population rises to the next income class. Simultaneously, competitive pressures force certain other people below the poverty threshold. These represent the transient poor. These people are currently poor but by no means restrained by their current poverty against rising through the income pyramid.
Then are there people who by currently being poor are condemned to be poor for their entire life, and even those of generations to follow? Sadly yes, and quite a few of them at that.
Dynamics of Poverty - Scaling up the Income pyramid
The income pyramid represents the basic framework on which the graph of poverty is drawn. The line income of a household will trace over time is determined by, other things remaining same, the age of the household and change in their income.
As mentioned earlier, a typical household has two ways of moving up the income pyramid - labour and enterprise. But a household below the poverty threshold, has only one way out - hard labour! This household does not have savings or income surplus or any access to finance (they are sub-prime!) to kick-start any enterprise. Even now, a household would not have a problem if labour opportunities are assured. Here is where the cusp of the problem lies. Labour does not always help this household scale the income pyramid.
The biggest hurdle - poverty!
Labour demand of an economy shifts every year across sectors. A very distinct shift is noticeable in farm labour's shift into industrial labour. Within this drastic shift there are micro-shifts moving between sectors from metals to plastics, from mechanical to electrical, from plumbing (hydraulics/pneumatics) to instrumentation (switch-gear). This movements create a chasm between available skill and desired skill. This chasm is difficult to cross without investment of time and money. Both of which our poor household does not have. Hence our poor household works twice as hard but does not get added surplus that can springboard it into the next income class.
Springboard for the poor - education and micro-finance!
The only way to help the poor out of this negative spiral is by making their labour ready for the market requirement and giving their enterprise a launch-pad.
Free training and education need to be made available to the poor. Agencies must use proper forecasting techniques and relevant research localised to the area to train the labour making them employable. Example - Locals in an area ear-marked for food processing zone, can trained in repairing, maintaining food grade machinery. Farmers can be trained in operating E-choupal kiosks and accessing mandi prices.
Micro-finance has a distinct role to play in this area. It gives the poor, access to capital to start their enterprise. Please remember micro-finance gives "access to capital". It implies financing "accessories" for the enterprise. And since its capital, return is estimated through study of potential viability forecast of the enterprise. Thus micro-finance can be a robust springboard.
And the safety net...
We discussed two main levers that give poor households income advantage. But poor households also need a safety net in the form of accessible healthcare and low-cost banking facilities.
Healthcare represents one variable that can reverse income gains very fast. Rising healthcare costs have pushed many a household into the depths of poverty. Hence access to clean and complete healthcare is absolute essential.
Low cost banking is a worthy enabler for the poor helping them keep their assets safe and secure thereby granting small insurance against thefts and burglary etc. It also helps bank create a credit history for the household. This history (knowledge / information) acts as a de-risking element for the household making mainstream banking credit available when required.
Such a minimum safety net would indeed be a great service a nation can do for its poor.
In sum...
Poverty is not always transient. It is a nations responsibility to create adequate anti-poverty infrastructure to help its poor rise the income pyramid. Proper training and Education, accessible micro-finance provide great opportunities for income enhancing ventures to blossom. Adequate safety-nets through clean and accessible healthcare and access to low-cost banking provide critical support to household's growth initiatives.
GDP, the scorecard of economic performance, does not adequately differentiate between Use value and Sale value. This can be illustrated with a simple example.
Use Value Vs Sale Value - Example
The GDP contribution of one coconut is sold is price of that coconut let say Rs 6/-.
A village buyer then drinks the water and eats the fleshy part of coconut, use outer fiberous cover as scrubber, uses the hard shell as a soap holder and later uses all of this as fuel to heat his bathing water.
A city buyer, typically, drinks the coconut water and eats the fleshy part and rest of it is discarded as garbage.
Now the use value of Rs 6/- is totally different in each case. This is what Karl Marx explained, in his paper called "Capital", the difference between use value and sale value. In this difference, or the divide between use value and sale value, lie many possibilities for innovation both for economic learning and entrepreneurial innovation.
Economic Learning opportunities - the hypotheses
First is related to computing GDP numbers. This divide implies that economies with higher ability to extract use value should feature higher than they actually do. Consequently, the algorithms used for estimating this value need to be tweaked to accommodate this difference.
Secondly, we need to interpret the GDP numbers carefully. A country may be actually creating more value than the GDP suggests.
Thirdly, I wonder if that is why economic development is accompanied by stress and loss of happiness (if it happens i.e.). Possibly in our hearts we know that by spending on packaged coconut water, plastic soap boxes and branded scrubbers we are actually in a loss (in terms of costs vs added benefit) than we were using plain old coconut.
Entrepreneurial Opportunities
On the other side, it also leads me to believe possibility of entrepreneurial innovation would be highest at the innovations bridging this divide. An apt example can be found in the story of "Idea on a leaky platter". Entrepreneurs can gain immensely from bridging this divide.
Bridging this divide helps increase measured GDP. Secondly the adoption of these innovation is much faster (it already exists!), therefore easier to monetise (that the only thing entrepreneur has to do!). It also leads to productivity gain as firm-based efficiencies come into play.
In Sum
Innovation at the divide between use value and sale value holds a lot of promise in terms of success for investors and entrepreneurs. It is this area we should be concentrating upon. What say?
Every morning my local newspaper reaches a new low in journalistic performance. The matter has come to such a state that I can trash my entire newspaper without even looking at it once and I wont miss anything.
Newspapers as they exists, seem doomed. They cannot fight television in terms of speed. The Internet beats the newspaper in terms of ability to cross-linkages ease of being discovered.
On top of it, it is really difficult of attract and retain a set of readers that advertisers would love to sell to. With money in the hands of people across the intelligence and vocations spectrums, tabloidisation seems the easy solution. Yet, it is now time newspapers realised that tabloidisation is not going to get them anywhere.
When I read in Indian express the interview of two very senior journalists - Tina Brown and Harold Evans - about this very subject, I hoped change would be round the corner. But apart from the comment that highlighted the importance of websites for the newspaper there wasn't much to look forward to. So what do newspapers do?
Jack Trout provides clear solution, that must be the answer. Newspaper publishers should differentiate among themselves, within themselves and within their readers to survive. While most companies know about the strategy, few know what to differentiate between.
Typically, for a family newspaper, readers are diverse. At the most macro level, diversity exists between families. Drill down and there also exist a diversity within each family unit in terms of age groups, maturity and gender. The appeal of each class, as created above, to the advertisers actually decides the target group. Analysis of consumption basket of target group coupled with typical annual advertising spends by brands in corresponding categories will logically decide best target segment.
Within a target household, there also exists diversity between roles of the readers. These can be classified into Skimming (glancing across headlines) and Analysis (in-depth coverage on headlines that catch attention). The content layout needs to be optimised for guiding the relevant household member to relevant page.
Standardizing the layouts effectively guides eyeballs. It also helps guide eyeballs if used creatively, case in point being the Google logos!
First and foremost, newspapers must differentiate within the pages. Newspapers have a systematic classification that puts city news on one place, political news on other place. From users point of view, it hardly makes any a difference unless the user can read into the classification. Newspapers seem to have forgotten that the classification must be based on users rather than news. That is the reason, why page 3 is called page 3. It would be great if newspapers can create brands out of their pages as successfully as "page3" brand was created.
For example, any mainstream newspaper may decide to addresses families of working families as their core target audience. Newspapers/periodicals are also known to target college going kids specifically. But as their audience is generically diverse - it is necessary pages are segregated properly so that advertising efficiency may be increased.
Newspapers need to address "news production" a little differently. Current news production process can be classified into event reporting, reporter investigation, content generation, editing and finally delivery. Let us first enlarge this process by adding "follow-up" to it. As far as I understand, it is the news agencies that do the event reporting. The real winning strategy for a newspaper, therefore, needs to reside in the later part of the "news production" process.
As Goldratt mentioned in The Goal!, newspapers must optimise the process on their constraint. Clearly world class reporters are the constraint in this case! Using the same reporters and content they have generated, can a newspaper publisher create various stories that can move from plain event reporting to analysis of social issues behind the event. I believe they can. The process is called versioning. Content generated by reporter investigation can be versioned to feed into the headline breaking news story, the reporter's blog or a deeply researched piece. In fact newspapers often have lots of versions of the story write-up ready. (These days they literally have lots of versions of facts - hence had to specifically mention "write-up"). To be able to achieve this, content created by the reporter needs to be redefined. On this redefined content publishers can unleash different sets of editors to make the story readable for different audiences.
In essence one set of reporters can create many newspapers without much cost addition. Alternatively, news can be versioned across editions. E.g. City in the story can have detailed write-up whereas other city editions can have shorter versions!
Once my boss remarked that if follow-up was an industry it would be the biggest industry! Websites give newspapers a mechanism to follow-up with their customers. Still if you read online content, it is an exact replica of the printed content. This, to my mind, defeats the purpose of the website.
Internet should have allowed all the newspapers to have faster reporting. If all the reporters could upload their stories onto a central database, tag it properly. An intelligent editor with local knowledge can simply check-mark and get the edition out. This will enable the newspapers to create as many papers as they want.
Newspapers are an area where there is lot of potential for creating value. Steps indicated above are just outsiders view of the industry. Insiders can really create more and better avenues delighting us readers with well created, updated and analysed news in a crisp newspaper!
I have just been disappointed with my channel surfing experience. This isn’t the first time and surely won’t be the last. Indian television is at its lowest ebb. Not surprisingly, the advertising rates are among the lowest in the world.
Making the idiot box smarter - adding intelligence!
I believe television today is simply too dumb! Most of the soaps tend to take generation leaps making some characters as old as 800years and counting. I guess it is time to use television as tool for information dissemination. Look at the videos of John Bird and John Fortune, about sub-prime crises and credit crunch. They use humour to make people aware about some aspects of happenings in the financial world that are, in all probability, soon going to make life miserable for common man.
Yet all we have managed is to put humour to some crappy idiotic use in prime-time news.
Possibly only Vir Das (below) and Cyrus Brocha have managed to entertain intelligently using humour on news channels.
Intelligence is waning - Channels please wakeup!
I guess this is but just one example. But I guess it should suffice as there is not much opinion against my views. It is time channels and advertisers realised that programming catering to intelligent audience tends to be sticky. The intelligent viewer is intelligent enough to come back to the program and builds a solid "discussion universe" around the program attracting more "intelligent-aspirers" to the fold.
In Sum
Its time to rethink about the customer, about our assumptions of their intelligence and relook at what we are offering to the world. In the long run, well made intelligent programs will create their following and will bring viewers back to the channel. I am sure by making programming relevant to the people the channels can create a sticky customer. Let us hope the channels have some "intel" inside their organisations! Now isn't it what advertisers want to pay quality bucks for?
Urbanisation of India has baffled me. Indian cities are a picture of most shoddy infrastructure and yet command more price than any other city in the world. Unlike Singapore, India has large land mass and there is no dearth of land supply. Also unlike other high cost cities, India’s per capita income does substantiate the prices in India. Therefore, what is happening and where will this lead?
Why prices are increasing?
The prominent reasons for increasing prices are said to be:
Rahul is spot on with his "delinking" comment.My company trades commodities from all over the world. We understand that the Euro is the new dollar when it comes to pricing.
I guess most of the Irory tower crowd is waiting for one of their own to write a paper to prove it.