When the markets are flying high, value investors tend to sit back and let things happen. When they crash, we must start looking for opportunities — dissecting information, scouring annual reports and proxy statements, and evaluating which companies will survive and which ones will die. (That's why I haven't been around as much lately. Sorry.)
Most "regular" people don't look beyond the stock price as an indication of how things are going — today's opening price versus today's closing price is an indication of how things will progress. Most "analysts" have something to sell, so the recovery is always just a quarter or two away (unless they're eternal bears — then the crash is just a quarter or two away). And then there are the realists — the Warren Buffetts, et al. — that say, "Here's the truth. Don't like what you hear? Sorry, but it's still the truth."
Odds are good that the US Dollar will likely get weaker. What's happening now is the result of years of poor economic management. We have long been importing much more than we've been exporting — to the tune of $712 billion last year.
[Non-US readers: Keep an eye out for this in your home country — the same problems will result in the same results, only the names change.]
All those corporate profits that could have been made in America — that could have provided more jobs, higher wages for US workers, and a stronger stock market — have been made overseas. Foreign companies flourished, but our people made the same wages. As foreign demand increased, supply tightened (as it usually does) and prices began to rise.
The Problem: US wages did not rise as quickly which means things started getting more expensive. Inflation kicks in.
Much like credit card debt slowly accrues (I already owe $750. What's another $30?), we headed down a slippery slope. The more we bought from overseas, the more supply tightened and the more foreign prices (and profits) grew. As foreign prices grew faster than US after-tax wages, foreign products became more expensive in the US.
One might think: Simple solution — buy American. Not so simple. Foreign products were still cheaper than their American counterparts. When choosing between being a good patriot and feeding the family, the choice is painfully simple for most.
As inflation creeps up, US products become even more expensive and foreign products become more attractive. During economic bubbles, most people ignore the data and base their buying and decisions on hope. I'll buy this house today because it will be worth more next year. Based on what? I'll buy stocks and mutual funds now because they've been going up. And? Wow! A 3% ARM? Give me 110% of my home's value! It will work itself out. How?
Most people will jump from tech stocks to real estate to emerging market stocks (through mutual funds or otherwise) and then spend their future profits because they are perceived as cash in the bank. Most people are bad savers and even worse investors.
How does this fit in? "Most" people drive our economy, and they have put us on a slippery slope.
Of course, you can thank the pinheads in Washington as well. By 1999, we were importing 28% more than we were exporting, a figure that had jumped 60% from the previous year, and that continued to grow in percentage and real dollars over the next eight years (as high as $759 billion in 2006).
So focused on other things and blinded by the real estate bubble (Hey, everyone has a house. This is great!), our government did nothing to curb the problem (e.g., increase taxes on imports, implement better trade policies).
They let history repeat itelf by allowing our economy to get into trouble like in the mid-1980s — a situation that resulted in higher inflation (near and well above 4%) from 1987 through 1992.
In November and December, Wall Street was calling for a turnaround by the end of the first quarter of 2008. Oops. Then they said "no later than Q2." Not likely. By late April, they should be calling for a reversal for the end of the year. (Think they have something to sell?)
In reality, our problems extend far beyond the next quarter. This mess needs to work itself out. To do so, we will likely suffer some 5%+ inflation for a while as we try to export more or import less. Less imports means we have to buy American at the higher American prices — hence, higher inflation. If we don't do this, American wages will remain flat or drop and inflation will quickly grow out of control.
The credit mess needs to work itself out. (Later this week, I'll talk about how stupid and irresponsible that Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, and crew have been for the last ten years.) Regular Joe American who can't pay his mortgage today ain't gonna be able to pay his mortgage at the end of higher-price, higher-inflation 2008.
I won't try to predict the direction of the markets over the next six months. I'll simply say this:
Are our problems "fixable"? Yes. Still, it won't happen in a quarter or two. We went through a trade problem like this in the mid-1980s and it took three or four years of fixing before we entered the boom of the 1990s. By that logic, our next boom would start around 2011 or 2012 — and that's only if we can solve these more severe problems in the same timeframe.
Your greatest asset right now is your earning power. As inflation climbs towards your expected investment returns, your actual investment returns will approach zero (or go negative) on an inflated-dollar basis. You can combat this in one of two ways:
You won't be able to "top-tick" or "bottom-tick" the markets so you shouldn't be focusing on one simple bond issue or investing entirely in workouts (or buy-and-hold stocks).
You'll likely have noticed that I haven't been as active on F Wall Street lately. It's not because I don't love you or that the market has me down. Quite the opposite — I am busy as hell ripping apart filings and looking for opportunities. (And I do love you.)
When the markets were flying high, I had all the time in the world to write posts for an hour or two a day. Trying to maintain that pace in this market would be detrimental to our future returns.
I won't be paying much lip service to the economy or markets because today's hiccups and stumblings have little bearing on how we invest. I'll do my best to offer some noise-free input, but take it with a grain of salt. At the end of the day, the markets will do whatever the gamblers force it to do on a daily basis; great businesses will grow and their prices will follow.
Remember to ask yourself: Which company will be making more money five years from now than it is today, and am I stealing it today no matter what the price does tomorrow? Which deal is virtually certain to close, at what price, and when?
Please wait while your comment is submitted. (It may take a moment.) Comments on F Wall Street are moderated which means that your comment will appear only after it has been reviewed by Joe. Comments are typically reviewed and approved (or denied) quickly, except between 11:30PM and 5:00AM (CST) – Joe has to sleep some time!
Thank you for participating on F Wall Street. Once your comment has been approved, it will appear here. While waiting, check out some other articles on the blog or click here to return to the article.
| Excel 2007 | | | Excel 2003 |
| (ZIP, 168kb) | (ZIP, 138kb) |
Mon @ 12:45PM | View comment
g said,
good timing!
BreitBurn Energy: Playing the Commodities Crash
Sun @ 1:14AM | View comment
mike said,
ROIC is not based on earnings. it's just EBIT * (1-t) / invested capital. The flaw with ROIC...
What The Heck Is CROIC?
Thu @ 8:00AM | View comment
Cale Smith said,
New Ponzio Capital site looks great, Joe, and good to see you back posting!
BreitBurn Energy: Playing the Commodities Crash
Wed @ 5:50PM | View comment
kalidasa said,
in correction to an earlier post, it is Sham Gad(www.gadcapital.com) or www.shamgad.blogspot.com
Hedge Funds and the Early Buffett Partnership
Tue @ 3:29PM | View comment
Joe Ponzio said,
I think it got overheated. I still feel like it's a good long-term holding (if the buy price is right)....
Is Nutrisystem Healthy?
Tue @ 2:48PM | View comment
Nutrisystem Coupon said,
Dude, what happened to this stock? You would think in January this stock would be jumping through the roof...
Is Nutrisystem Healthy?
Dave
Mar 17th, 2008
14 comments
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Adam
Mar 17th, 2008
Also, by outsourcing, companies saved more money, allowing them to invest and grow their cash. Jobs being made outside of our country doesn't hurt our economy. And if the government were to tax imports as you suggest, consumers would be hurt by the higher prices forced on them.
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
tomas
Mar 17th, 2008
3 comments
here are 5 i am looking at; i bet if you do your DD you will get excited about at least one, maybe more?
CBI
CX
SNDK
BRCM
SIGM
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
kfh227
Mar 17th, 2008
27 comments
And in my opinion, any finance stock that is a Berkshire holding is worth a look. USB and WFC in particular.
And giving these times, I am considering the sale of one of my beloved stocks, TJX. It's gotten ahead of itself, not by much, but it might be time for me to part ways with this long term hold.
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Enoch Ko
Mar 17th, 2008
1 comment
http://blog.enochko.com/2...
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Joe Ponzio
Mar 17th, 2008
Joe on twitter
Ponzio Capital
It is similar to a business that can't generate enough cash, except that taxpayers are the revenue streams and printing cash is the extra "borrowing". The interest burden falls on us "customers" in the form of inflation.
Adam: American companies were (and are) importing and selling the stuff; foreign companies provide too much of the materials, manufacturing, and staff. When our American companies are growing, we expect them to create jobs here in the US, and to increase wages in the newly created and competetive job market.
When those companies choose to create the jobs abroad, our economy suffers because the people that drive our economy - the consumers (in all senses of the word) - don't benefit from the growth in prices and profits through increased wages amongst more workers, and the ability to spend more.
Prices continue to rise; wages don't follow suit. Our American companies flourished, but our economy experienced a much smaller benefit and began setting itself up for a recession (or worse).
Stick with me because I intend to do a couple of follow-ups to this post to provide more clarification.
tomas: Thanks!
kfh227: Make sure you have inflation protection - companies that can increase prices ahead of inflation, that are somewhat shielded from this mess, and/or that are at such a substantial discount that you can't bear the thought of passing on the opportunity.
Finally, make sure you are 100% comfortable and confident in every decision. You don't have to buy, sell, or hold today - but, you should when the opportunity is right.
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Dan
Mar 18th, 2008
36 comments
"Farmers and holders of urban property seemed to benefit [from hyperinflation] if their property was mortgaged; the inflation soon wiped out the mortgage debt."
That seems counterintuitive...how does inflation reduce or wipe out mortgage debt?
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Night
Mar 18th, 2008
72 comments
When you have a static debt and inflation hits, usually wages/income (I can especially see this for farmers, who create their product with relatively few inputs & sell their product for more) have to increase somewhat to offset the inflation or everyone starves to death. So now people have a higher nominal number of dollars, and mortages are static debts.. So they are comparatively smaller and easier to pay off than before.
Imagine going back in time to the 1940's when a loaf of bread was a nickel. You'd be rich as hell. During times of inflation that only applies to static debts, though.
(would fixed debts be a better way to put it?)
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Dan
Mar 18th, 2008
36 comments
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Dan
Mar 18th, 2008
36 comments
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Joe Ponzio
Mar 18th, 2008
Joe on twitter
Ponzio Capital
In real estate, as inflation brings prices up but the loans against the properties remain the same (in dollars), property owners win. Example: If a property owner can raise rents at the pace of 5% inflation, (s)he would see an increase in $1,000 of cash flow to $1,629. At 5.75% on $100,000 she would pay $584 today, and $584 in ten years. Her net cash would grow from $417 to $1,046 in ten years.
Real estate (like certain companies) can be a great hedge against inflation if it is purchased right.
Nice run up on CCU today. The deal looks pretty sound, but I'm not positive on the timeframe. There is (or was this morning) enough of a premium to buy in, even if the deal can't close until mid-Q2 (though they're calling for end of Q1).
The senior note buyback and the division sales are a little unnerving. Are these at the right prices, terms, and timetables for the deal? (I assume the acquirers are involved on all of these.) Or, are they creating opportunities for the acquirers to break the deal because they don't like the terms?
In addition to the financing, these are the things that I think could upset the applecart, if it does get tipped. I also think that's why there has been such a huge premium as of late.
I think there is a little more risk here than there was in RTSX or TRB; that alone doesn't make it a good or bad workout. Risk + Premium = CCU looks/looked pretty nice.
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Nick
Mar 18th, 2008
There is a little bit of a leftist political bent to it, and they fail to mention hard assets as being storage for debt, but it is still a simple and shocking video.
Just thought it was fitting to this post Joe.
Nick
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Night
Mar 19th, 2008
72 comments
Tender offer:
"The completion of the Merger and the related debt financings are not subject to, or conditioned upon, the completion of the tender offers or the related consent solicitations or the adoption of the proposed amendments with respect to the Notes."
Though, how these notes work is honestly not something I understand yet. Could someone please explain? http://news.moneycentral....:CCU&feed=BW&date=20080306&id=8297928
TV Station divestiture:
"Further, the sale of the division is not a condition to the closing of the merger described above."
And that sale is complete now. Also, a completely seperate company bought these than the company aquiring CCU.
Radio Stations:
"Further, the sale of the division is not a condition to the closing of the merger described above."
These are still in the process of being sold, and not all stations are covered by definitive agreements. It shouldn't matter though, right?
Am I missing something?
I am still in CCU :) Good luck to us :P
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Joe Ponzio
Mar 19th, 2008
Joe on twitter
Ponzio Capital
One clause in all merger agreements states that the deal can be cancelled if there are any material adverse changes in the target company's position or business. So you must ask: Are these steps at these prices and terms materially good for the company or can they be considered "adverse" for the company's position. (i.e., should the TV unit have been sold for $1.2 billion as originally planned or was it still a great sale at $1.1 billion?)
All I'm saying is that these are potential applecart tippers and that this deal is not as certain as the others we've done in the past. Because of that, you should:
- demand a greater spread (premium), or
- be willing to move on to the next deal.
Simply put - a 5% premium on RTSX was perfectly acceptable. In CCU, you should look for a greater premium (perhaps greater than 8% or 10%) to compensate for the greater risk of similar deals falling apart.This particular deal may go through, but as you do 100 of them over the next 5 (or 20) years, you'll find that the "CCU" deals fall apart a little more frequently than the "RTSX" deals. As such, the larger premium is required to compensate for that.
Make sense?
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Night
Mar 19th, 2008
72 comments
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Dan
Mar 19th, 2008
36 comments
Joe - as always I'm interested in your take.
( REPLY | PERMALINK )
Your Name
Feb 9th, 2010