Some ideas on analysing Real Estate Developers

Real estate developers have been a significant part of value creation for investors. And they will continue to be. However, as times get difficult, it is important to pick the right developers to invest in. While these are logical, they are often ignored in my experience. I present an idea-Book looking into some key ideas while selecting successful real estate developers. Key points include:

• I believe first thing a developer must be sensitive to is business cycle. Irrational optimism leads to a fatal failure in preparing for eventual slowdown.
• Similarly, land bank quantity, quality and cost determine the future earning potential and growth of the developer.
• Developers’ also need an ability to manage through-cycle earnings for the company. In search of quick profits, developers often condemn the company to future revenue de-growth and lower or negative profitability.
• Cash flow management and debt structuring is other critical part of real estate business that can make or break the company.
• Lastly, I mention some ways in which real estate developers prevent value realisations for the listed entity.
• I hope these learning’s will be helpful. These do not comprise the complete list and must be used in conjunction with standard investment and valuation procedures and practices.

Please find the ebook enclosed below.

IdeaBook on Investing in Real Estate Developers

Hotels: Part of Asset builder boom

Rising asset prices over last few years triggered demand for more hotels. Calculated Risk links to article Hotels: A "Perfect Storm" in San Francisco indicating how the house of cards falls.

Actually this is a perfect storm everywhere for hotels. Too much supply - and more coming online every day. Too much debt. And too few guests.

Where is the demand?

Like most other assets, the fundamental demand for hotel turns out to be far lesser than the supply. The demand is coming from investors. There is huge appetite for investing in hotels, housing or any asset that can be converted into paper and gambled away. This is hurting the industry employee base.

Product prices do not indicate fundamental demand

Just because prices are rising does not mean there if fundamental long term demand in place. Reading the macro factors is just as important for the firm. But, what if you can quickly build out a hotel and sell it to REIT (or other RE fund) at ridiculous cap rates? Partly, this asset price increases actually triggered the boom as I discussed in Feb 08. I cannot see the last buyer still emerging. So till then its going to be painful and hotels will be a case study.

Declaration:

I own Indian Hotels since two years now due to fundamental short supply scenario in India. I am just about marginally positive on the position. I do not intend to close it for few years. Hotel investors looking at India might want to look at Indian Hotels.

Decline of Alpha

Markets around the world are in a see-saw. It is not exactly clear what is driving what or who and to be fair no one really knows. The trading strategies have, therefore, moved to seeking beta.

Volatility Risks high

We are looking at huge cycles in coming months. These will be higher in magnitude and shorter in time frames making longer term commitments difficult.

Picking Survivors

Now long term is more about picking survivors than picking value. Unfortunately old world stalwarts are not always well suited for this. I am not even sure if company like GE will survive this in current form. But then GE is much better off, we are just debating the form!

Premium for alpha investing will increase

Longer term investors will seek increased premium as volatility increases and questions about company health become more aggressive. I would like markets to remain range bound at lower end of the range for at least 2 quarters. That might signal some hope of recovery. Current movements are too swift (time) and too strong ( changes are high between weeks). Possibly its just residual froth.

Art of Startup: Lynn Terry on Pursuing Passion or Profits

Lynn Terry says get financially secure before starting new business you are passionate about. There are two mistakes people make

1. People start a new business without being financially secure. They may be passionate but bills and debt always mount. The first part of being entrepreneur is understanding finances and cash flows. If you cannot secure yourself financially, how will you secure your company?
2. Even when they have financial security people often start a business they are not passionate about to make a "quick buck". Lack of passion of owner shows up pretty fast. That is why venture capitalists want to meet companies face-to-face. Such businesses often languish at the first dip.

Pursue Passion… or Profit? (video): "

You know how people always say, do what you love and the money will follow? I’ve probably even said that a time or two myself, but I’ve decided that it’s flawed…

Instead, do what makes the money and your passion will follow. I know that may sound like a contradiction, but follow along with me here.

My first business was an electronic repair shop. Not something I was particularly passionate about, but it paid the bills. I was passionate about having a family business and pursuing financial freedom, of course. And I enjoyed the work - it just wasn’t my “passion in life”. My next business included computer training and web development - helping others learn skills to start & grown their own business. Something I was definitely passionate about, but I didn’t really have the means to do it on any kind of large scale. Meaning I was basically helping one person or one business at a time. But those were the right choices at those times in my life, because the bills had to be paid and the children had to be raised. It wasn’t until my business saw a sustainable passive income that I had the financial freedom to really discover and pursue my passions.

It’s hard to even know what you’re passionate about when all you can think about is how you’re going to make the next mortgage payment, or put dinner on the table next week. Even worse is that nobody else will get it. If you’re working all the time, with no profit to show for it, your friends & family will tell you you’re nuts and tell you to go get a real job. But if you have money coming in, nobody will mess with you - and you’ll be free to really start exploring your options. My point here is that I don’t want you to feel discouraged if you’re just starting out, and you haven’t discovered your true passion yet. That’s okay. Try a few things, make some money first, and let it just come to you naturally.

The cool thing is that the internet provides you the opportunity to do both - to make money AND pursue your passions in life. My own online business allows me to work from home, and allows me both the time and money to work on a series of books I’ve always wanted to write. So I do that, plus give back to the Internet Marketing community, because I have a passive base income that pays the bills. The main source of my income being my affiliate sites and various affiliate promotions.

It took me years to find my place in it all, and create a vision of the lifestyle and future that I wanted - and a plan to fund it. But every single one of those years that I wasn’t 100% sure I was going in the right direction… I still earned a full-time income. Money is necessary - so pursue that first, and let the passion find you when you’re ready for it.

Trust me, it will happen when you’re less stressed about making money.

So get out there and make some money!

Best,

p.s. If you need help making money online, join my group at our Internet Marketing Forum. I check in there daily myself, and would be happy to answer your questions, or share resources with you.

"

Documenting processes at offices

Recently I was party to a discussion about understanding office processes improving them. The arguments were standard, processes are ad hoc and it is difficult to capture tacit knowledge. That reminded me of a document I had created a long time ago on How to do exactly that. I have put that up online. Have a look.

Process Documentation & Improvement Ebook

Future of Hedge Funds

The future of hedge funds is under microscope. Some believe, hedge funds are evil and hence would die. Others believe higher regulatory burden will spell doom. I believe reality might be contrary.

Flexibility in capital allocation is critical

The need for flexibility is the central lesson from recent toxic asset debacle. Funds that are flexible are better suited to surviving the near future. Hedge Funds derive a little advantage flexible than private equity and lot of advantage over pension funds.

Flexibility applies to strategies as well

A flexible strategy may be better than a sector specific or other constraining strategies. So between strategies it might be better to allocate more capital to flexible ones.

Stock selection will undergo a change

Within the investment process changes will happen.

1) Currently, lot of funds use "owning stocks" mentality. Fund managers try to foresee how demand for those stocks will move. They are not buying companies like Warren Buffet. Due to higher volatility with lower volumes owning stocks is likely to work with very large caps (blue chips). Further, any long term (>6 months) investments will have to be "owning companies" type of investments. Some funds already work with this mindset and are consequently better off.

2) Focus on macro drivers will increase. Macro drivers impact capital flows into markets and therefore can make or break portfolios.

3) Holding periods will decline. Given the volatility in stocks, flexible managers can take advantage of capital flows.

Employment generation

Given the changes above, we are likely to see more diversely talented and diversely located teams supporting investment managers. Further, we might see a drop in capital/manager to ensure higher flexibility.

The survival game

Survival is the name of the game for next 3-5 years. Both for funds and companies. We are likely to see a drop in total money supply in the next few years. Capital will be destroyed through two ways. First through companies going bankrupt. Second volatility impacting AUM of asset managers. So picking survivors is the key.

So if any hedge funds have an opportunity for me, check out my profile and drop me a line. ;)

Market Outlook

Paul Kedrosky has a wonderful link to interview of Michael Steinhardt and others. There are a lot of quotation gems in there. I paraphrase a few ideas with my take on it:

• No one is bullish over long-term: The problems we are in, in US and globally, are too big to be wiped out by a ill-directed few trillion dollar stimulus. Government does not have information to go for precision-bombing stimulus. So for carpet bombing, that we are aiming for, we need a hell lot more bombs.
• What has changed? - Nothing: Other than extra few trillion sloshing around nothing has changed. We still seem to be playing out the same moves from great depression times. Our two most likely outcomes are a bloody great depression or a prolonged stagnation - both are grim. Markets are enforcing themselves - I mean real economy markets. Consumers are de-leveraging and increasing savings.
• We cannot estimate valuation because future is uncertain: The future is uncertain. We are not confidently able to foresee how future corporate world will look like. What will be the revenue levels? What will be the growth levels? Who will survive the crisis? In such a scenario, putting numbers to revenue projection and looking at valuation is dangerous game.
• A forecast tells more about the forecaster than the future: This is a gem. I think that is true. At the moment all analysts will be better off understanding potentially likely scenarios and potential outcomes.

Future Without Poverty

World without poverty is one of my dreams! And I fuss over it in lot of ways. My readings of current writers on Poverty suggest that we need a view on life of the poor. This ebook is an attempt to express the same. It is my contribution to understanding and eradication of poverty in the world. Download the ebook here.

Briefly it covers three main aspects:

How poor get poor?


I look at three phases over which a household gets into a poverty trap. This, I believe, is critical to understand as it harbours solutions to the poverty problems. Further, it also leads us to a basic framework for solving the poverty crisis everywhere.

Snakes and Ladders Approach


Getting a community out of poverty needs a customized solution. Each community faces its challenges (snakes) but has opportunities (ladders) hidden within its structure. This framework may be used to build a customized approach for the community.

Structural v/s transient poverty 


One of the central idea I want to highlight is the difference between temporary poverty - one that household can get out of versus structural poverty - one that seduces the household into believing that they can get out of poverty.

I would love to hear your feedback on the ebook. Please email me at rahuldeodhar [at] gmail [dot] com.

A Clear Policy on future bailouts

Senator Ron Paul is keen to get the Fed audited and closed. I don't know how that will pan out but I would seek clarity in one aspect of Fed's functioning. The bailout criteria needs to be defined and communicated.

We need a decision tree to understand how Fed will hereafter decide who gets bailed out. The current "case-to-case basis" and "threat to financial system" arguments are too esoteric. We need clear principles and guides to understand how such decision will be made in the future. There are four critical element of "Guidelines of future bailouts" plan:

1. We need clear understand of who can seek a bailout. Is it banks? Are insurance companies allowed? Who is allowed? Who is not? Why?
2. The next part is within this set, who are eligible for bailout, how will you choose? What self-help measures the company has to go through first before coming to Fed for the bailout? What if someone exceeds Fed's / other regulators benchmarks for leverage? Or pays excessive bonus? Will those companies get bailed out too?
3. How will the bailout amount be decided? Will it come entirely out of Fed gurantees? How about untouched bonus pools? How about unwinding risky position in hard-to-sell paper?
4. What happens after companies are bailed out? How will they be restructured? How will Fed ensure that those funding the bailout (US citizens) get control over the company?

It is right time to initiate the plan. We have Ben Bernanke at the end of his term. We have some green shoots so markets are reasonably calm to absorb and accomodate the rules of the game. I believe this will reduce uncertainty in the markets. I think it is a moral duty to explain to tax-payers how future bailouts, if any, will be decided. Moreover, I believe tough times lie ahead. It is better to be prepared with a plan - at least for things that we know we might need.

Exchange Rate appreciation

The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) announced the monetary policy on tuesday 28th. In one of the innocuous statements RBI mentioned it will allow appreciation of Rupee if there is higher capital inflow than can be managed through intervention. Not many commentators weighed in on this at the time. But that represents the most important signal.

Felix Salmon explains the dilemma of the asian central bankers in more details. RBI has sensibly tackled the financial crisis as of now and this indicates RBI is one of the intelligent central banks around. China faces this dilemma more critically as it wants an undervalued Yuan. To top its list of worries the GDP is rising really fast. If there is one way to attract big money then this is it.

There is a good chance central bankers will soon resort to good old capital restriction. This will be the first blow in the test of globalisation. This threatens to raise the friction between countries. We are witnessing increase in friction over anti-dumpting duty imposed by EU on Chinese.

Such regulatory threats have the potential to create more cycles in markets. So this is definitely going to be painful - we will have to hold our nerves. Fortunately or otherwise, we cannot, will not be able to reverse the globalisation.

Why no one saw the crisis coming?- An explaination for Queen Elizabeth II

The question reminds me of King Charles II who invited members of the Royal Society to explain why a dead fish weighs more than same fish alive. After the Royal society provided various explanations it was brought to everyone’s notice that they actually weigh the same! It is the same with current economic crisis.

The group of eminent economists could not foresee the current crisis due to “failure of collective imagination of many bright people”. In my humble view, your highness, this is incorrect. Nobody actually bothered to make the real‑world observations. How could one not notice unemployed people buying multiple homes? Or, how could they not notice people with mortgage repayments more than their incomes?

Such ignorance on the part of trusted few will cost the world dearly. The developed world, including Great Britain, is on throes of worst economic decline spurred by international debt. We are facing a decline in standard of living that will undo decades of development. In such times of calamity, the elites are busy retrofitting explanations to history. The “group of eminent economists” has been deeply inbred and so have all other eminent groups who run the financial system. These are groups formed between likeminded fellows, those conforming to specified views. These groups have shown clan-like behaviour ridiculing alternate points of view. One only needs to look at ridicule heaped on likes of Peter Schiff, Nicholas Nassim Taleb, Nouriel Roubini and others. These groups lack diversity of opinion to understand multiple facets of financial, economic innovation.

I further disagree with the economists’ gracious claim that everyone was doing their job to the best of their abilities. If guarding the door “to the best of our abilities” when thieves attack through the window, you are not much of a guard, are you? Sadly, even the press has abandoned its duties of fourth estate. Our journalists no longer reflect on social implications and problems but often report from their own ivory towers. We haven't seen any pointed intelligent debate between press and policy makers even as policy response aggravates the crisis further.

To ensure such crises never occur again, we need more respectful cross-disciplinary debates involving social understanding and moral values. We need philosophers and cross disciplinary thinkers more than ever. Usually, such is the responsibility of the House of Lords. Are there, if I may humbly ask, real knights amongst your ranks, your majesty?

Note: This is a response to Guardian Story about Economists explaining how the crisis happened to the Queen.

Future of Financial innovation

There has been a lot of talk about financial innovation being bad for general populace. Economist blogs about it Financial innovation in the rearview mirror quoting Tyler Cowen and Felix Salmon. This pulls up a paralled to pharma industry in my mind.

Just like we have drug testing labs for pharma companies, we need labs and regulation for finance innovations too. In a sense, sub-prime was a drug being directly tested on population. The result is predictably disastrous. The Consumer Financial Protection Agency (CFPA) could take up such a role. Then, if pharma is any indication, we will have lot more innovation in the near future.

Pharma industry also created higher cost structure to foster innovation. The regulatory burden along with pseudo-barriers in the name of intellectual property created unaffordable costs. The opportunity before the CFPA is to set the benchmark for simplied, easy to athere but difficult to cheat, low cost regulatory structure. CFPA, all eyes are on you!

Chris Anderson explains Free / Freenium

A lot of people get confused with Chris Anderson's book free. Particularly because his book is free. Here he explains the concept in details. A fantastic read about changes in business models.
Charlie Rose - A conversation with Chris Anderson of Wired Magazine

A re-polarization in Risk Structure of Investors

Tadas Viskanta notes how hedge funds have survived the current crisis in his post The curious incident of hedge funds during the financial crisis Abnormal Returns. This refreshes an old idea I had earlier about polarisation of investor companies based on risks.

Capital providing institutions were divided into two based on this. Banks (low risk) and Equity investors (higher risk). But now we have finer risk classifications. The resultant business models were, in a crude way, spread across the risk spectrum. The downside was the risk demarcation became a little (a lot?) fuzzy. Large banks too moved towards higher risk assets (CDO etc) and were burnt. Equity investors came with low-risk schemes that have mostly lost money. The money-making strategies in current market situations align better with clear risk demarcation. That's why possibly hedge fund survive.

The investment rules getting too tight is basically a risk reduction strategy. It will be wiser, possibly, to remove constraints on fund managers. Money managers who manage their own book may be better off with the flexibility (provided their reading of markets is correct of course).

China led recovery?

The largest consumers, US, EU and Japan are spent. US has domestic and corporate indebtedness. Japan still languishes from the lost decade. EU members sit across the spectrum between US style indebtedness to that of 1980s Japan. Only country who has the right cards is China. It is significantly big and fast enough to turn the course of the history. So then will China play its hand right?

Well, it is not inspiring any confidence to say the least. Micheal Pettis points to Notes on a real estate trip in China where we realize that Chinese policy of investment driven demand is banging against the wrong wall. China is looking for the final buyer that we discussed earlier.

Meanwhile, I notice market feedback, logic structures and arguments are regaining 2007 flavour. This definitely does not auger well for any of us. It is as if markets have noted Roubini near term possibilities but are still ignoring Taleb's long term solutions. (Taleb has attacked the root causes VAR, (ill-applied) probability theory, portfolio theory and algorithm trading framed on these.)

Where is the Greenspan Model?

I remember that there is a Greenspan model that Alan Greenspan used to determine if markets were fairly valued. It pointed to over-valuation in 1998 and again in 2004. Where is that model now and what is it indicating given the current earnings scenario?

Fail safe regulation!

Obama's financial sector regulation is under scrutiny. In one word will it prevent crisis - no. Will if prevent this crisis from occurring again - possibly. Why? Is it so ineffective? Well no, the terms are well intentioned. What we need is Fail-Safe regulation.

Fail Safe - engineering definition v/s common definition

There are two definitions of fail safe. Generally, fail safe means does not fail. Whereas in engineering fail safe means - when it fails it does not cause harm. It is impossible that regulation will never fail. So financial regulation needs to apply engineering definition.

Using Engineering fail safe regulation...
Now we need not regulate hedge funds, or investment banks or increase their capital adequacy beyond certain limit. We simply need to ensure that when banks fail they do not take the world with them. Hence I proposed the new banking system.

In the new structure, we should see polarization of financial institutions along the risk axis. The high risk FIs, like hedge funds and private equity, will never be bailed out. Investors into these asset classes should sign a government disclosure that they know they can potentially loose their money - just like hedge fund investors. We will see more groups joining hedge funds and private equity in this pole.

In any case regulation has to take responsibility for low-risk financial infrastructure part of the system, leaving other pole to dynamics of capitalism.

In Sum...
The current regulations are good intentions with potentially poor outcome. I hope Obama advisors are able to get around to the engineering fail-safe regulations.

Market turmoil and picking Survivors

Global markets showed weakness again today. Over the past few days global markets have weakened about 2% per day. There are theories that point to a three week correction before a pick up in prices.

Picking survivors
A popular anecdote highlights importance of holding stocks for long term. So people often tell me - so what if price is too high - just "sit on it" for XX years and you will be fine. Unfortunately that is a wrong strategy. Current situation is more about picking winners.

Winners change and lot of companies fall by the way-side during times such as these. In a smaller crisis, bigger companies are typically better off. But not so for structural crisis such as we are seeing now. A long term investment strategy is more about picking survivors. Survivors will loose less value when market falls and will rise higher when it gains.

Airline example - British Airways and Singapore Airlines
Airline operators were part of massive industry slowdown after 9/11. These two companies used this opportunity to replace their fleet with young more fuel efficient planes at reduced prices thus building tactical advantage for years to follow.

Stockpiling Commodities - What is China doing?

China stock-piling commodities or buying US assets seems useless to me. If US dollar were to loose value and commodities / dollar assets were to retain value – then technically Chinese Yuan should also retain same value. US dollar starts loosing value means commodity prices start shooting up. Meaning, in technical terms, US will then export its inflation to the rest of the world. There are few responses to this –

• the world keeps global exchange rates constant
• The world let dollar go down alone
• Some allow exchange rate changes some (like china) dont

If everyone keeps exchange rates same – we will have another recession and commodity prices will come down. And whatever you do this cycle will repeat itself till world is sick of the pain. The fundamentally sound parts of world can recover if they let currencies appreciate.

Holding commodity assets signals the Chinese intent to keep the Yuan (RMB) hard pegged to the dollar. This is clear signal of pushing towards "status quo". The stockpile will help China reduce the inflationary impact on its economy while US recovers. But ideally this should require inventories equal to the expected duration of such inflationary scenario.

The only other reason could be - China expects disruption is supply chain. Such disruptions occur in crisis - so China might be preparing for crisis possibly even a war.

China's domestic demand and other notes

Brad Setser starts a wonderful discussion on "How can we explain growth of China while all other export oriented economies continue to slide?" Thereafter follows a range of serve and volley explanations that are delicious treat for thought! Here are my views:

Walmart sales increased when other retailers went bankrupt because Walmart was lower cost than most. Same logic, I believe, explains partly why Chinese exports did not slowdown as much as others.

China’s monetary expansion will have two components – domestic stimulus and US treasury demand. It will be interesting to understand which will be bigger and will there be any crowding out effects.

If you push large liquidity through the system fast – high value, long-term assets (houses, stocks, etc) tend to inflate. This keeps overall inflation low (since these do not form part of consumption basket) giving an impression that everything is fine. This corners the excess liquidity to one end of the pool. Eventually the system breaks but till that time we have fantastic illusions.


Problems of Europe
Europe is about 13 billion giant (excluding Russia). Problems of Europe will impact world recovery to the same / slightly more than problems of US. We have somehow left Europe out of discussion.


Domestic demand / Market
Creating domestic markets is not easy and does not simply happen by throwing capital. Domestic tastes and preferences, as we see in India, are lot different than we anticipated. Same logic should hold for China.It is easier to customize goods (like restaurant services) are easy to manage – but inflexible goods (capital goods e.g.) take long time. The changes cascade from consumer side till they reach the top end. Examples:

1. A large part of textile industry may be geared to service cotton clothes – whereas Chinese might prefer silk. (OK I simplified it a bit too much)
2. You take milk, some producers added some hormones to aid milk production. Resulting milk was not safe for children. Now we need institutions, legal, regulatory etc that create a feedback system to discover and curb such practices. These complex frameworks anchors in democratic setup – leading us to political minefield.

If someone clarified the entrepreneurial scene – we may actually get better clues about domestic demand. Large entrepreneurial pool backed by venture funds experimenting with products and distribution is the best way to create (and an indicator for thriving or potentially thriving) domestic market.

The easiest part of domestic demand stimulus is to allow top brands to enter the domestic market and give them some price leeway through currency appreciation. Louis vitton bags, Chanel perfumes etc will kick start domestic consumption faster.


Psychology of excess
This is one of the problems facing China. In its quest to stimulate – it might create excesses that can haunt it later. Large ammunition is mega problem if it explodes in you own backyard.


China is our hope
Our global recovery hopes are pinning on China. The question is does China know and will it take the responsibility?

A New Banking System

The current crisis made us realize how financial sector in general and banks in particular can hold the economy hostage. The crisis was precipitated by a credit freeze triggered by fall of Lehman Brothers. As a response Fed kept pushing money into the bank but none of it reached the deserving households or small enterprises. So we know we need a new Financial system. Mike has a nice post about The financial sector we want.

Rethinking banking - Banking as water management system
We can think of banking as water management network. We have water reservoir, the piping and usage meters, then we have used water drainage, used-water treatment and back to other reservoir. The used-water is savings that feed into the reservoir - bank deposits. The worst part of banking crisis was the looming disappearance of the the piping and drainage network.

Now, the network needs to be as big as possible, bigger the better. A larger network means accessibility across the country / world, it means freedom for the consumer. It means the network will be operated like a utility company, with very small fee and highly regulated operation.

The reservoir however, needs to be small enough to be manageable. And more the merrier. Here replacing one by other will ease the strain on the economy. In radical times, Fed can directly be the money reservoir and plug itself into the system.

Tomorrow's Banks = Today's banks - Banking infrastructure "system"
So we are looking at splitting banking into three parts - financial infrastructure system, deposit taking institutions and loan making institutions. While, the last two can be same, they cannot ever be infrastructure. Glass-Steagall Act achieved this in smaller degree. I think, looking at recent experience, it makes sense for the financial infrastructure to be government owned. At least, it needs to be heavily regulated large utility like power transmission company or water supply company. Alternatively, it can be a well-designed Internet based system as well - then no need for any company.

What is financial infrastructure system?
The role of financial infrastructure company will be that of a conduit. Citizens will have an online account, with a free (zero fee+ zero charge) debit card. It will allow the citizen to login and allocate his/her savings to deposit-taking-institution of choice that can manage it with promise of interest income. The system will collect a fee from deposit-taking-institution as an insurance against insolvency of the institution. The amount of fee retained will depend on rating of the institution.

Further, lender (including credit card providers) can lend to citizen based on report generated by system. These reports will protect privacy as per legal guidelines and give information enough for processing creditworthiness test. It may also generate a FICO-like score for the borrower. Lender, once satisfied, can be plugged into citizen's account. The system will schedule and process payments or at least set alerts to prevent defaults.

Privacy and prudence
The suggestion also raises privacy and government intrusion concerns. I am not sure I understand all the problems that may arise in such scenario. However, it is definitely an idea worth exploring.

An increased (though very small) probability for War

Probability of war seems to have increased. It is still small but definitely increased. Though it is unlikely that India will be involved in one (we never invaded any country in 5000 years - so we dont have the mindset) But, look how different war-indicating trends are catching up.

1. China has more males in its population - typically when the pop ratio gets skewed the chances of war increases. Further, income polarization is very high in China.
2. Recession will make more people (mainly youth) unemployed and in financially distressed situation - implying combative etc
3. US-china have classical debtor-creditor problem any strong arm by China will not be taken lightly by US. China believes it may be wronged by the US. If US dollar devalues then you can be sure things wont be easy on this front.
4. War is by far the biggest domestic stimulus one can give - creates domestic jobs and stuff hence politicians are ok with war in such times.
5. The typical flash points are visible - Afghanistan Pakistan is now a flash-point. If Us forces are attacked or get in some trouble then we could see drastic actions. Earlier North Korea, Malaysian protests, Demonstrations in Greece were some flash points ( though none as big as Af-Pak)
6. Religious alignments are getting more stricter - talibanization of SWAT valley in Pakistan is an indicator. To certain degree, Obama election has reduced any polarization along religious lines that we saw earlier in US.
7. US policies and other global stimuli are going to result in more income polarization. As global inflation strikes the differences will become more evident - I can foresee Mary Antoinette - "if you don't have bread eat cake" statements.
8. Usually such conditions are off-set by economic growth (that promotes peace) - but that has near about halted in past few months. Now if things do not improve we could be in for much tougher times.

Since last year I have been advising small businesses (even if uncalled for many times - and often at risk of being sounding intrusive) to preserve cash and lower debts. This is time to tighten the seat belts and check the gun in glove compartment for bullets just in case.

So I say it again - better prepared than sorry!

Global Slowdown Solution VI: Going Green and Blue!

Given that real stimulus will take a form of modified Keynesian approach- we need to know what are the "highways" of today. During the last depression, the building of highway and rail infrastructure got the US out of trouble. This time, to my mind, it has to be Green and Blue infrastructure.

Going Green

US has been victim of development invention. Most of the infrastructure / engineering of the country is based on older technology thats not green. Few years ago when the green revolution was knocking at the doorstep, it was difficult to see how US and developed world can re-engineer the entire setup to go green in a meaningful way. Luckily the current situation presents us with an opportunity to do just that. In doing so, US will lay the foundation for competitiveness for the coming decade or more while adding to comfort on global warming.

Going Blue

While green is important, blue is even more so. By blue I mean developing potable water resources. Greening, apart from using lower emission fuels, also means creating tree cover and rebuilding green-ecosystems. Initiating this will require potable water sources. Further water is the most essential commodity for sustaining life. Investing in rain water collection ponds and lakes, water seepage assistance to rebuild ground water resources etc will have to take precedence. India has got an initiative off-ground through India water portal.

Implications for cities and homesteads

If at homestead level we can create sustainable water and green infrastructure, we will have a much better self-sustaining planet. That imlies our city-oriented development models will have to be modified to make it more sustainable.

Implications for current economic slowdown

The ability of these initiatives to create jobs is under-rated. If properly deployed these initiatives may create more jobs and more self-satisfaction than most optimistic forecast. These initiatives have unique character. They need huge manpower up front and then possibly the overall manpower requirement for sustaining this effort will be about 3% of original. This means they can create enough jobs to reduce unemployment rates by some perrcentage points in initial years. And the man-power can be freed in few years as economic activity resumes full steam.

In Sum

Green and Blue are compulsions. We either take up our share of responsibility or implications are large and life-threatening. As they say, "nature does not do bailouts". The opportunity has presented itself - lets grab it!

Elizabeth Warren on John Stewart show

Elizabeth Warren speak colloquial on John Stewart show. As he says "it feels like Financial chicken soup".

Is Recovery Just Around the Corner? | The Big Picture

Jack McHugh goes on to look for answer to famous question - Is recovery just around the corner?

Sometimes I am ashamed of how pessimistic I have become. But nothing tells me that we are closer to situations when fundamentals are sorted out. I think the bottom here is fixed - its way below from here for US markets. A slower descent implies longer time to see the bottom. Implies more pain - and slower recovery.

With current healthcare situation and age demographics as they are - I see US consumers going towards 15% saving rate as sustainable rate going forward. Under strong dollar regime it means income de-growth and therefore sustainable consumption will be a long long way below current levels. In a weak dollar regime, it would mean, higher inflation sharper fall and concentrated impact of consumption dip - with a possible under-shooting below sustainable consumption level. On a discounted basis these both will be equal impact in all likelyhood.

What this implies is that sustainable world consumption should see a 1.5 the dip seen at US (roughly). So the only way to recovery is when jobs seem safe and incomes stop falling. Note this is just the average - so we will see a dip below this to about 2X US consumption loss. So stock markets should reach corresponding levels.

Newer Orgnisation Structures

One of my pet implication of the global slowdown is changes in organization structures. I think this is one of areas where organization-citizen relationships are going to be redefined. We are going to see restoration of balance in this relationship. Currently, organizations have disproportionate leverage that is being misused. It means new value-chains, new types of organizations based on skills.

No one has noticed but Apple just did that - the application part was moved out of the organization into public domain - modifying the traditional value chain that Friedman mentions.

Further I think organization-employee relationships are going to change fundamentally. We will have new loose forms of organizations that can fail easily and not become tighly controlled - economic behemoths that can hold entire economies to ransom. The new form of organisation will most likely have Schumpeterean creative destrution switch built into their DNA making them more efficient, vibrant through fail-fast, fail-safe means.

Richard Koo on Balance Sheet Recessions

Richard Koo on Balance Sheet Recessions (from Paul Kedrosky) gives an interesting perspective on global crisis and how possibly Japanese way could actually be a best case scenario. At the fag end he goes into really interesting implications for politics, differences between current crisis and Japan that is critical.

Japanese crisis was essentially corporate balance-sheet crisis. Current crisis is US and European household balance sheets and financial institution balance sheet crisis. Japan has strong household and financial balance-sheets. So fiscal stimulus kept Japanese consumption going. In addition, export demand did not actually fall off a cliff. These two issues will make current slowdown actually more horrible.

US households bear weight of global production. US financial bear weight of global capital supply. Both are in a mess. The stimulus required to pull-off a Japan-style escape will be of global proportion - and definitely out of league of Fed. Even by Japanese experience - global deficit would be roughly 8% of GDP. Disproportionate amount of it will come from US which implies ~ 18-20% of current US GDP. This weakens the dollar (that is good) and probably kindle some hope for US economy.

Implications

• Despite everything US and European GDP will have to fall structurally.
• We are looking at structural global GDP contraction - but unevenly spread.
• Solve household balance sheet problem - solve the crisis.
• Global realignment of production and consumption center is evident.
• Unstable political storms are coming - watching Af-Pak closely.
• Increasingly worried about China - hoping sense prevails.
• Increasingly confident of two-engine approach to economy. Wealth creation engine (entrepreneurship) and wealth distribution engine ( domestic consumption & resulting jobs)
• India looks strangely best positioned - thanks to the fact that its government's hands are tied!

Auto Bankruptcy will worsen the slowdown

Obama has been decisive in Auto bankruptcy case. While the intent is commendable, letting Auto companies go bankrupt will damage the US economy more.

Auto Companies represent a really big and powerful wealth distribution engine. At this point, wealth distribution engine health determines how much bailout actually reaches the common person who is at the heart of bailout.

Obama saved banks to ensure credit lifelines to the common person survive. But if auto companies go bankrupt, they take pensions, incomes and multipliers with them. It will be like preventing heart blockage but stabbing the patient! 

I hope Obama gets his team to explain these things to him before he signs off on anything! Just pray!

Global Slowdown Solutions V: Global Crisis - first principles

Global crisis is a result of three elements freezing together - an overleveraged buyer unable to buy more, a seller without access to credit to create supply and non-existant market where no one trusts anyone.

We cannot fix all three together as all three elements are vastly globalised and hence too big to fix all at once. So it makes sense to get back to basics. The entire economic system was created with demand at the center. When demand existed - supply emerged and market appeared to match producer and consumer. So we need to fix demand first, help supplier get started and things will start taking care of itself. But!

First lets get demand straightened out. Demand in recent past was excessive - it will never be that high any time soon. But however small - we need it. Demand comes from wages and employment certainity. This is the basic of Keynesian stimulus - create jobs system will fix itself. So this would have solved our problem this time as well - had it not been for credit starved supplier.

The supplier, earlier, was driven by equity and debt was but a cash-flow smoothening mechanism. Then we realised the power of leverage to amplify returns, create surplus wealth thereby creating a separate investor class specialising in just providing capital unleashing entrepreneurial energy. This class made the entrepreneurs leverage themselves to the maximum possible limit. This culminates today into credit being necessary mana for the suppliers to produce goods. Without supplier there is no market!

The market essentially is an infrastructure provided to suppliers to help them address demand - through exchange of goods and services. Market works on marginal cost of exchange. Markets usually take care of themselves so long as demand and supply exists. The maximum fixing markets needs is through ensuring rule of law - enforcement of contracts, protection of aggreived, ensuring people don't cheat or muscle out others etc. Markets are even oblivious of fairness of law - so long as law exists and they get implemented markets will get created.

Hence the crisis will be resolved if we solve the demand (consumers') problem first. Then we need to fix suppliers' access to credit. It is ok to have latent unsatisfied demand - that often gets channeled into savings. But excess supply translates into inventories and they have costs and lead to supplier anemia. Ensuring law and order will help markets get back in shape soon enough.

US Solution has been antithetical to first principles

The solution so far has exactly moved in opposite manner. We tried to make market functional by rough-shodding over contracts and ensuring cheater get away with it. We tried to ensure liquidity to help with supplier credit. All this while - the consumer is facing increasing credit card debts, lower job prospects and total loss of confidence in possible return to reality. We haven't really done anything to prevent creditors making predatory moves on consumers.

The solution to the crisis is essentially a modified Keynes' approach. We need to create jobs while fixing the system in coordinated precision. The kind that won Nadia Comaneci her perfect 10. And the stakes are higher there is not saffety net - no silver medal!

Selling Tata Nano to US

Apparantly Tata plans to sell Nano in US by 2011/12.

Fundamentally I think it makes sense in car-oriented US cities now wanting cheaper transport solutions. This is the kind of consumer behaviour shift that we can expect in the coming years. Typically, such changes take decades - but economic hardship can hyper-accelerate them. US consumer will be seen cutting cost and looking for cheaper solutions.

Global Slowdown Solutions IV: Create earnings credit will follow

Current problem won't resolve by just establishing an alternate credit channel. Once the US credit channel is available. Credit flows based on certainity of earnings. Economist's View: Galbraith: No Return to Normal indicates how Galbraith points to this critical point. Let me paraphrase Galbraith:

In other words, Roosevelt employed Americans on a vast scale, bringing the unemployment rates down to levels that were tolerable, even before the war—from 25 percent in 1933 to below 10 percent in 1936, if you count those employed by the government as employed, which they surely were. In 1937, Roosevelt tried to balance the budget, the economy relapsed again, and in 1938 the New Deal was relaunched. This again brought unemployment down to about 10 percent, still before the war.

The New Deal rebuilt America physically, providing a foundation (the TVA’s power plants, for example) from which the mobilization of World War II could be launched. But it also saved the country politically and morally, providing jobs, hope, and confidence that in the end democracy was worth preserving. There were many, in the 1930s, who did not think so.

What did not recover, under Roosevelt, was the private banking system. ... If they had savings at all, people stayed in Treasuries, and despite huge deficits interest rates for federal debt remained near zero. The liquidity trap wasn’t overcome until the war ended. It was the war, and only the war, that restored (or, more accurately, created for the first time) the financial wealth of the American middle class. ... But the relaunching of private finance took twenty years, and the war besides.

A brief reflection on this history and present circumstances drives a plain conclusion: the full restoration of private credit will take a long time. It will follow, not precede, the restoration of sound private household finances. There is no way the project of resurrecting the economy by stuffing the banks with cash will work. Effective policy can only work the other way around.

We have to realised that credit and banking feeds off global real economy. It is actually a cost, however small, for the real economy. So once jobs come back and incomes stabilize (at whatever levels), you will see credit coming back. Without certainity of earnings, the credit channel goes in self-preservation mode - waiting for certainity to return. Being global, the channel can absorb far more bailout/stimulus than any single nation can provide.

The problem of global income adjustment and therefore credit offtake ability will hit us next. This is the heart of the problem. Next: we will see how we can fix this!

Global Meltdown Solution Part III: Alternate credit channel

The global credit channel is a central sysmptoms and collateral damage of current crisis. The core of this is in US and therefore US government agencies are attempting bailout after bailout. The US government is not liable for rescuing an essentially global channel. It's first duty to clean the domestic channel. The two are cross connected to such a degree that they cant tell what they are fixing.

The solution, to my mind, is simple. Create an alternate credit channel - what I call "the modified good bank solution".

• Create a good bank - with regulatory charter that allows lower capital norms, higher government guarantees etc. so that it will have liquidity, capital and ability to acquire assets.
• Let it give credit to worthy borrowers who have the ability to repay.
• Create a mass loan transfer drive - where the borrowers to move their loans to this bank - rather than buying loan books from established banks.
• Accelerate the process by establishing uniform common minimum norms for acquiring loans. Start with lowest risk with highest documentary evidence.
• Augment the document checking using other government agencies workforce.
• Repeat the drives till you have covered big chunk of population. Government can take over some homes and convert them into temporary offices - establish geographically wide network - quickly.
• This bank should be broken up into managable units and privatised at a pre-committed date in 5/7 years time.

The global bailouts are more complex. This should be funded with pooled money. Using the IMF or world bank is a good starting point. More on that later.

Addendum: Why Us needs to fix domestic credit channel first?
US is biggest consumer of the world. The world needs able US consumers to continue to spend albeit to their comfort level (and definitely to lesser degree). The able and wanting consumers are currently being denied a chance to consume. This is dtrimental to everyone.

Global Meltdown solutions Part II: Dispersion of production

Changing producer competitiveness

The question is invariably based on Michael Porter's work on competitive advantage of nation. The only modification is understanding the structural or fundamental advantages. We need to separate out the transient, artificially imposed advantages. A deliberately devalued currency is such a transient man-made advantage. And it will break down. Michael Pettis, makes a fantastic argument how trade policies can influence producer dispersion.

Who will be new producers?

Producers are located due to various competitive advantages of a region. One of the reason is quality and cost of manpower - let us call this man power profile. Similarly we have a job profile of an economy. Job profile, for simplicity sake, is based on technical knowledge prequisites and volume of work. Now ideally in sustainable case the job-profile and man-power profile of an economy should match. Currently there is a mismatch in developed world. US and EU jobs are getting polarised between unmovable low value addition activities on one side and exceptionally high value adding activities on other.

Man-power profile will stablize

The volume of low-value addition jobs will have to rise in US - to fit with lowering relative education standards. Now education system in US is way better than other nations. So we are simply comparing US in the future to US in recent past. The problem is in very short-term jobs movements are a zero-sum game (time till entrepreneurship discovers new jobs). So it means US wanting jobs will mean job losses in other part of the world. That, to my mind, is a seed of discord in near future. Hope is migrant workers might go back to home countries and US might actually have a brain drain to ease the pressure a wee-bit. In medium to long term US entrepreneurs will definitely figure out a way to create value in new and innovative ways -creating jobs for the economy.

Seamless dispersion of production centers
The intersection of man-power and job profiles will mean a more seamless dispersion of production centers across the world. The first demonstration of this will come when some manufacturing jobs moving back to US.

Global Meltdown solution Part I: Consumption centers

Who can be consumers?

Citizens, who have savings and income to replenish the savings post buying goods and services, can be consumers. Rest cannot! That implies the developed world - probably with exception of Germany and Japan, cannot be consumers. China, India, Indonesia and other countries with domestic savings will be our consumers.

Value of consumption

Currently, the exchange rate equations are aligned to repress the consumption behaviour of these populations. In the interest of global recovery these equations will have to be reversed. This will entail a lot of protectionist pressures that are detrimental to consumers. Such measures will wipe out any hint of global recovery.

Not consuming is always an option

Typically protectionist measures reduce the quality of local goods, increase prices and thereby cheat consumers out of their hard earned money. Today, the globalised consumer, is aware of product benchmarks and price parity across geographies. In current situation, consumers may simply "not consume" inferior products. They will choose to increase their savings.

How protectionism is detrimental to the world?

This means the advantages of protectionism will accrue only if it continues for prolonged period of time in near future. Till it continues - global depression will continue. It means you will see more enforcement at customs counters in airports, ports and national borders. It means increased smugling of attractive goods establishing a supply chain for drugs, weapons and other illegal trade. All detrimental in socio-economic terms.

Global Meltdown solution - Introduction

I have been amongst the most pessimistic about the prospects of global economy. There has been a lot of harping about what got us into the current mess. Together the blogosphere has painted a picture of gloom. And now that we have painted this dark tunnel it is time to paint the light and the end of it! It is time to decipher the solution to the crisis.

One of the reason great depression lasted as long as it did was because of delay in acknowledging the solution. The solution was always there - no doubt - but it took time for the solution to win over the decision-makers into coordinated action.

Thanks to globalisation and internet based coordination, we should be able to do it faster this time. If only we had the solution - or may be we do!

I present my side of solution in next few posts. Let us march towards a light - any light to begin with!

Defer the US debt!

What if China and Japan the major creditors of US reach an agreement to defer the US debt repayment. China and Japan own the largest set of US treasuries with certain interest rate. US needs cash to service the debt - in current situation this cash will be better spent on re-creating jobs. This is one type of response to a debt-default situation. Convert the debt into equity or preferred equity with payments deferred over time with a slight moratorium included.

I think this should be a good aim for US political establishment to start off the recovery process. It will be even better if China and other US creditors unilaterally take this stand.

Or possibly I am going nuts.

Which country comes out of slowdown earlier?

To understand this, I believe we can look at two metrics.

Capital waiting to be deployed could be a metric to understand how effectively can the wealth creation engine be primed. The current US consumption based wealth-creation will have to be rewired to domestic demand driven wealth creation. This is one reason why investors look for telecom and FMCG companies. They are better wired for such situations. But the real boost comes from entreprenerial activity that feeds into such sectors or creates new markets around such concepts. These entrepreneurs drive value creation and GDP growth. The question really is how much capital is available to be deployed into the economy. This consitutes available bank credit,

The second metric is effectiveness of the wealth distribution engine. We can call it multiplier effect. If an economy has enough structures to distribute the wealth creation across the population then better are its chances in current situation. Here, a consumption based economy like India would feature higher than manufacturing-export let China. But evaluating this factor is a little soft-factor based analysis.

Investors have figured out the first one and therefore rushing into China. Yet, most have very limited understanding on how the second factor works. I think both factors are necessary to create a push out of the slowdown. But given how connected capital is globally, I think the weight of second factor might be higher. What say ye?

Worst Recession ever!

The current recession is now definitely going to be worse than the Great Depression. The excesses that created the mess are being stretched beyond sustainability. Now even Niall Ferguson and Nouriel Roubini agree on this.

The main reason is US government, taking heart from USD's global reserve currency status, is priming the economy at an unimaginable scale. Taking the US example lot of countries are attempting a similar strategy. It would be important to note that this is not simply printing money but creating debt.

The current strength of USD is due to global slowdown. The world will soon realise that depending on US consumption is not going to happen anytime in near to medium term. As the relative strength of domestic markets start, we can forsee a battle for share of pockets of savers. This, to my mind, will be the begining of the end of US dollar.

Personal and Government indebtedness

The contextual relationship between balance sheet of citizens and their government, to my mind, holds the key to evaluating responses to current crisis. We see three main segregations:

• China and some developing countries – where both government and personal savings are high
• US and developed world – where both government and personal debts are high
• Countries like India – where personal savings are high but government is seriously indebted.
  

Keynes solution is meant for the Chinese situation. So Chinese are spot on with their solution. But it is still not clear if this will work in China. Keynes’ solution needs a robust wealth-distribution mechanism that China lacks. Therefore, we need to watch Chinese government actions keenly. Other countries with surplus will be better off if they have access to markets for their produce and Keynes-style stimulus will be the way to go.

For US and other developed countries, the same Keynesian solution will put their future in jeopardy. Beyond a certain tipping point, there will be a bigger crisis looming. It will start with Chinese stopping the US bail out. China is bailing out the US who is in turn bailing out most of the world. Surprising that Chinese want so less say in who gets their money. Possibly, they got a raw deal. Anyways, if China continues stimulating both US and domestic Chinese economy, it will end up like India! As the scale of stimulus or bailout increases, I get ever so more worried.

India is in further mess. It has the consumers who can spend but its government cannot do anything to stimulate the economy. So India will have to sit tight till domestic economy revives on its own. It won’t grow at a pace similar to past 2-3 years but it will still grow robustly. Indian slowdown is likely to be deep and short. After the initial bubble bursting, you will see Indian consumer wring his/her hand in despair and get about their normal trend-line consumption.

So in all, everyone has large problems.

Surviving the current crisis

Current crisis is going to test the best. It is going to strain finances to the brink of banckrupcy. So how can small businesses survive in this challanging environment? Simply put, using two rules. Cash is king. Stay humble - stay together. Let me elaborate.

Cash is King!

In any crunch / slowdown what matters is staying power. Cash gives you a fantastic buffer to outlast the crisis. Here are a few steps that can help conserve cash but remember each case is different - so careful with these.

Income Side

1. Diversify income streams: Now is the time to cross-sell ancillary stuff around your key products. Generally - lower cost items that enhance longevity of the product get better business in these times.
2. New Products? Remember the customer focus has changed from "saving time" to "saving cost"! In tough times objects not central to functionality are difficult to sell. So T-shirts about your brand are less likely to sell at premium. But smaller price point items that reduce cost for customers are desired.
3. Merchendise ads: It might make sense to sell merchendise at cost as a substitute for local advertising. (Caution alert)
4. Mittens with ovens: Give add-ons and make selling price reasonable. Be fair to all - be fair to youself in setting the price. Sometimes add-ons help - again things ancillary to the product use will get better sales. Give away mittens with ovens!

Cost side:

1. Know your costs: 10% discount if you by bigger lot - may not always be a good idea.
2. Cut costs like crazy: Reduce inventory, negotiate with suppliers for discounts.
3. Throwing away money? Reduce wastage, a lot of things can be reused - if not by you - by others who will pay for the stuff.

Employees or your team?

Big corporations are quite fast at reducing employee head-counts. In my view, this is a really wrong move - more so if you touted "employees are my assets" mantra. I believe employees are like players on your team. In such times rather than cutting employees - you can change payment terms. An employee taking home $1000 can now take home $500 as fixed cost + $500 as variable. For next 5 years base the variable on cash contribution to the business. And remember - pay-cuts go from top to bottom and hikes go from bottom to top.

Henry Ford v/s Greg Mankiw and real arguments for free trade!

Greg Mankiw, whose work and insight I really admire, argues against protectionism of Obama government. However, he does make the popular point - that lower Chinese Yuan helps keep cost of US consumption basket lower. Henry Ford turned this argument on its head and increased wages of his labourers so that they can afford to buy the cars Ford made. In the same vein, I think Americans would be happy to afford higher cost products and buy them rather than have low cost products that they cannot afford. To make it clear, I am not denying the beneficial effects of lower cost products. Just that the real argument for free trade is different.

US needs to keep the roads to China well-paved. Sooner or later the Chinese Yuan will appreciate against the US dollar. Then US will need China to keep trade barriers lowers to allow US access to Chinese markets. But that means keeping US trade barriers down in current scenario. Obama talk on protectionism might only serve to precipitate the currency regime change. But even just talk will be harmful for US interest in the longer term. Obama will do well to take up Wen Jaibao's free trade argument.

Inflation v/s Deflation

Cassandra has a post on Inflation v/s Deflation that highlights and links to some interesting points-of-views on the debate. The most interesting bit she quotes from Dr. Perrry Mehrling is:

Everything in the post is correct, and very much on the minds of every Fed watcher. The question is, what does it mean? I have what may be a contrarian view.

It seems to me that what we are seeing is simply the balance sheet consequences of the Fed's decision to take the wholesale money market onto its own balance sheet. Banks (and other entities) that used to lend to one another, are now lending and borrowing through the intermediation of the Fed. This is so not just domestically but also internationally (the huge swap line), since foreign banks used to fund dollar asset holdings in the dollar money market.

In this view, inflation seems much less likely. Why not? If the original wholesale money market borrowing and lending was not inflationary, then why should its substitute be inflationary? Indeed, the real question is whether the expansion of the Fed's balance sheet is keeping pace with the contraction of money market credit more generally. If not, then the consequence may be deflationary.

David Pearson argues in comments that inflation and deflation are also impacted by velocity. The arguments by Cassandra and David Pearson are interesting to say the least.

My thoughts are more aligned with fluid dynamics when thinking of money flow. This is not a laminar flow or a standard textbook turbulent flow. This is, to my mind, a special case of turbulent flow. I think big money will swamp certain markets testing the regulatory strengths of gate-keepers - while we have dry patches of liquidity crunch at some other places. The "tipping point" (as David puts it) is going to be realisation of true value of US treasuries. That will start a true "dance of the headless chickens" in the big-money space.

Capitalism Fundamentalist

I have often mentioned that the balance of power between corporates and citizens is misaligned. Naomi Klien in her book The shock Doctrine Rise of Disaster Capitalism tries to examine that same issue. Here is Naomi in interview with Charlie Rose. There are three different issues involved. First, corporations do get favoured status v/s the citizens and that hurts vast majority citizens to favour a few. Second, this is usually forced at the time of crisis. Third, usually government is the one that enables the favouring of status.

Naomi, further, gets into a debate with Milton Friedman's ideas. However, in certain areas, she does mention that she is simply against this collusion between governments and MNCs. Ithink this is playing wrongly on the word "shock" and mis-construing Milton Friedman. Kindly note that I do not fully endorse Friedman's policies but I agree about his views on difference between "intent" and "experience" of soft-hearted well-meaning policies. Austrian Economists has post on Milton Friedman's arguments against Naomi Klein in the video editing (there are 6 other videos if you like this one).

Charlie Rose asked her about India and China - she does mention about China but ignores India. India is real example as it followed the traditional middle-ground between socialism and capitalism. Indian constitution states the country as "socialist". And Indian experience shows correct example of her first quote "Only a crisis actual of perceived produces real change - when the crisis hits the change depends upon ideas that are lying around." India is a classic case of this being done in right fashion. Indian 1991 balance of payment crisis led us on reform path that has put more people out of poverty than 40 years of semi-socialist administration.

I believe she is correct in her observation of collusion between corporates and governments. I believe that this is being "streamlined" and this threatens the very roots of capitalism - as even Milton Friedman would argue. I am hoping that experts like Prof. Elizabeth Warren will restore this balance. I am hoping this "credit shock" will be a good time to "push this reforms"! :)

Monetary policy of China - is it a fault line?

Prof. Micheal Pettis is one of best commentators on China. His latest post on monetary conditions in China is a little scary. I have few points:

1. I don't think China will be able to undertake fiscal expansion to the scale required.
2. A monetary contraction is higly likely to impair Chinese financial system.

Essentially China is exactly where US was in Great Depression. The scale is different and scale can be China's enemy no.1! Further China agreeing to fund further US treasury expansion looks unreasonable. It will possibly compound the problems - as China cannot accept the entire lot US dishes out and retain enough capacity to wait it out. It is at this point fair income-distribution structure prevents social unrest. China will have to fix this urgently.

In sum, thats a whole lot of trouble heading China's way. Thankfully, Chinese government acts fast - let us hope it does so now as well. Else all the world is going to be in trouble!

Is Bernanke-Paulson outsmarting all of us by front-ending bailouts?

If bailouts are front-ended and funded through G-secs then at least US gets more money/treasury than it will at a later date. After the world discovers that US is going to default - no one is going to be ready to buy the treasuries and their prices will fall through the floor.

So in effect, Us will already have all the money they need to actually bailout the companies BEFORE investors panic. And then even if the world shuts its doors to US treasuries - so be it!

Its not unfair - but it is just saving your own skin!

Satyam and types of scams

There are essentially two kinds of scams

• First where money is siphoned off by paying higher to related parties as suppliers
• Second where profits are added to show higher performance - typically if pay is related to profits / share prices.

The interesting part of Satyam (assuming Mr Raju's statement to be true) is that it went from second type to first type scam. I think thats where it became unmanagable. I would like to believe it is an isolated case but I would not bet my money on this. Ajay Shah has interesting piece on three zones of corporate governance. Type 1 scam affects Zone I and Zone II in big way with large number of cases, less money involved, not easy to recognize for outsiders. Irony is that powerless individual investors are involved hence not much is impacted.

We are surely going to see more uncovering of scams in coming months.

Bullshit Promises

Professor Elizabeth Warren has a pointer on bullshit promises. Dr. Warren, my favourite on the subject, has been at it for quite a while now - battling powerful lobbies. Bullshit promises are about overtly promising something really appealing but actually using disclaimers actually promising exactly opposite - sort of trapping a consumer. Authors Curtis Bridgeman and Karen Sandrik dissect bullshit promises in great detail. Another of my favourite blogger, Yves Smith at nakedcapitalism, comments on key points.

One of the outcomes of this financial crisis I am looking forward is reversing this balance. For long we have corporate enjoying more benefits against consumers. Prof. Elizabeth Warren intends to change that. When she succeeds, we will have much better balance of power between buyer and seller that is core to revival.

Links:

Bridgeman and Sandrik Paper on Bullshit Promises

Elizabeth Warren pointer on Bullshit Promises

Nakedcapitalism on Bullshit Promises