Tag: finance

Submitted by Lance Roberts of STA Wealth Management,

As we enter into the two final months of the year, it is also the beginning of the seasonally strong period for the stock market.  It has already been a phenomenal year for asset prices as the Federal Reserve's ongoing liquidity programs have seemingly trumped every potential headwind imaginable from Washington scandals, potential invasions, government shutdowns and threats of default.  This leaves us with four things to ponder this weekend revolving around a central question:  "Does the Fed's Q.E. programs actually work as intended and what are the potential consequences?"

1) Three Questions For Ben Bernanke (via ZeroHedge)

David Einhorn of Greenlight Capital turns his attention to Ben Bernanke with three primary questions:

"We maintain that excessively easy monetary policy is actually thwarting the recovery. But even if there is some trivial short-term benefit to QE, policy makers should be focusing on the longerterm perils of QE that are likely far more important. Here are some questions that come to mind:

 

How much does QE contribute to the growing inequality of wealth in this country and what are the risks this creates?

 

How much systemic risk does the Fed create by becoming what Warren Buffett termed 'the greatest hedge fund in history'?

 

How might the Fed's expanded balance sheet and its failure to even begin to 'normalize' monetary policy four years into the recovery limit its flexibility to deal with the next recession or crisis?"

2) Heal Thy Economy Or Fuel The Next Crisis  (Project Syndicate)

Nouriel Roubini, a professor at NYU's Stern School of Business, plays tag team with David Einhorn questioning the policies and programs of not only the Federal Reserve but of all global central banks.

"As below-trend GDP growth and high unemployment continue to afflict most advanced economies, their central banks have resorted to increasingly unconventional monetary policy. An alphabet soup of measures has been served up: ZIRP (zero-interest-rate policy); QE (quantitative easing, or purchases of government bonds to reduce long-term rates when short-term policy rates are zero); CE (credit easing, or purchases of private assets aimed at lowering the private sector's cost of capital); and FG (forward guidance, or the commitment to maintain QE or ZIRP until, say, the unemployment rate reaches a certain target). Some have gone as far as proposing NIPR (negative-interest-rate policy).

And yet, through it all, growth rates have remained stubbornly low and unemployment rates unacceptably high, partly because the increase in money supply following QE has not led to credit creation to finance private consumption or investment. Instead, banks have hoarded the increase in the monetary base in the form of idle excess reserves. There is a credit crunch, as banks with insufficient capital do not want to lend to risky borrowers, while slow growth and high levels of household debt have also depressed credit demand.

As a result, all of this excess liquidity is flowing to the financial sector rather than the real economy. Near-zero policy rates encourage "carry trades" – debt-financed investment in higher-yielding risky assets such as longer-term government and private bonds, equities, commodities and currencies of countries with high interest rates. The result has been frothy financial markets that could eventually turn bubbly."

 Nouriel's comments touch on a topic that has become much more "mainstream" as of late which questions whether asset prices have once again began to over inflate.

3) 5 Signs The Stock Market Is In A Bubble (CBS Moneywatch)

Larry Fink, CEO of giant money manager BlackRock, clearly thinks the market is frothy.

"We've seen real bubble-like markets again," he said at a panel discussion this week, according to theBloomberg news agency. "We've had a huge increase in the equity markets."

 

Fink and many others are concerned about the impact of the Federal Reserve's "quantitative easing" program, under which the central bank is buying $85 billion a month in government bonds and mortgage securities in hopes of stimulating economic growth. These assets have vastly expanded the Fed's balance sheet, including recently. Since Sept. 4 alone, those balance sheets have increased 4.3 percent, while the S&P 500 has increased 4.9 percent.

In other words, investors are doubling down to capitalize on the cheap money that continues to flood the market."

The financial markets have long been seen as a gauge of future economic activity.   As the stock market rises the economy has also risen.  However, that has not been the case over the last several years with the economy stuck at a sub-par rate of growth.  Today, with the high degree of correlation between the Fed's balance sheet and the financial markets, it is getting increasingly difficult to make the case that the markets are reflecting anything but themselves.

 

4) Why The Fed Can't Taper (Via Pragmatic Capitalist)

Fraces Coppola, proprietor of the Coppola Comment, recently discussed the issues behind the Fed's inability to "taper" its current Q.E. program.

"Tapering is removing central bank support of asset prices. Unless not just the US economy but the GLOBAL economy is "on the up" at the time that tap
ering commences, the result of tapering will be a global fall in asset prices. That isn't going to cause hyperinflation, as the Austrian school thinks, but it would cause a global recession.

 

I'm afraid it is not US fundamentals, but global fundamentals that will determine the Fed's ability to taper. If the Fed tapers when the global economy is already in the doldrums, as it is at the moment, the recessionary rebound to the US economy would be considerable.

 

Because of the US dollar's pre-eminence (and the pre-eminence of USTs, too – we don't talk about that enough), the Fed is effectively the world's central bank. It is high time that the US accepted that its monetary (and fiscal) policies must be driven by the needs of the global economy, not just the US. The 'exorbitant privilege' is an exorbitant responsibility, too."

QE Doesn't Do Much

As I discussed this past week the reality is that the Fed is now caught in a "liquidity trap."  If they begin to remove its liquidity support the markets, and the economy, roll over.  The results would like be quite devastating for investors.   However, continuing to push asset prices higher also will eventually end badly.  It is quite the conundrum for the Federal Reserve and for investors.

While the Federal Reserve continues to push its liquidity programs, the reality is that it does little for economic growth.  Nobel Prize winner Eugene Fama discussed with Rick Santelli how the only thing that really benefits from QE programs, other than asset prices, are the "expectations" of benefits on the economy.  He explains, in the following CNBC interview, that there is really no reason why QE programs would have much economic impact at all.

 

How we got here is one thing.  Apparently, getting out will be quite another.  John Hussman summed this all up well:

"In regard to what is demonstrably true, it can easily be shown that unemployment has a significant inverse relationship with real, after-inflation wage growth. This is the true Phillips Curve, but reflects a simple scarcity relationship between available labor and its real price, but this relationship can't be manipulated to create jobs (see Will the Real Phillips Curve Please Stand Up). It's also true that changes in stock prices are mildly correlated with subsequent reductions in the unemployment rate and higher GDP growth. But the effect sizes are strikingly weak. A 1% increase in stock prices correlates with a transitory increase of only 0.03-0.05% in subsequent GDP, and a decline of only about 0.02% in the unemployment rate. So to use the stock market as a policy instrument, the Fed would have to move the stock market about 70% above fair value just to get 2.8% in transitory GDP growth, and a 1.4% decline in the unemployment rate. Guess what? The Fed has done exactly that. The scale of present financial distortion is enormous, and further distortions rely on the permanent belief that there is actually a mechanistic link between monetary policy and stock prices.

 

We know very well the mechanisms and actual historical relationships between monetary policy and financial markets, and doubt that any amount of quantitative easing will prevent a market slaughter in any environment where investors find short-term liquidity desirable (QE only “works” to the extent that zero-interest liquidity is treated as an undesirable “hot potato”). Still, the novelty of quantitative easing, and the misattributed belief that monetary policy ended the banking crisis, has created financial distortions where perception-is-reality, at least for now. We believe that the modifier “for now” will prove no more durable than it was during the tech bubble or the housing bubble."

It is something to ponder over the weekend.

 

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/z3oFuW4ocXw/story01.htm Tyler Durden

For over a year we have discussed that in Bernanke’s centrally-planned markets, in which the risk-return formula is now wholly absent the former, the best source of “alpha” (purely in the context of recognizing that the market has become a complete and total joke) for over a year has been going long the most shorted companies. And as we reminded just over a month ago, the most shorted stocks have returned double the broader market in the past year alone. Which is why we were not surprised to see that none other than Goldman yesterday, issued research formalizing none other than going long the most shorted stocks in a piece titled “Investors focused on the results of high short interest stocks.” Since Goldman is legendary for flipping at inflection points, especially with a 1+ year delay after the strategy has been working flawlessly, this probably means that going long the most shorted stocks is no longer a viable source of “alpha.”

From Goldman:

 

Short interest as a percent of S&P 500 market cap is currently 2.1%, in line with the average over the past year. While the share of market cap held short stayed flat, the short interest ratio (days to cover) has risen steadily since April 2012 as volumes remained low.

 

 

This week, investors focused on how stocks with high short interest as a share of market cap are trading this earnings season. Of the top 50 reported S&P 500 companies ranked by short interest, short interest ranges from 6% to 31% of market cap. Short interest for the median S&P 500 stock is 2.1% of float cap.

 

High short interest stocks reported a similar frequency of earnings beats and misses. Revenue results skewed more positive. 26% of S&P 500 companies beat revenue expectations while 36% of high short interest stocks exceeded consensus expectations by one standard deviation or more.

 

High short interest stocks were more likely to outperform the market on the next trading day than the typical S&P 500 stock indicating that there may be short covering post-earnings results. 58% of the high short interest names outperformed the S&P 500 one day after reporting results versus 47% for all reported S&P 500 companies.

 

However, performance of the median high short interest stock is similar to the median S&P 500 stock since the start of earnings season. Since October 4, the median high short interest stock returned 4.6% while median S&P 500 stock returned 4.1%.

 

Next week, six stocks with over 10% of float share held short are expected to report: Frontier Communications (FTR), IntercontinentalExchange (ICE), Windstream Holdings (WIN), Chesapeake Energy (CHK), Dun & Bradstreet (DNB), and Cablevision Systems (CVC).

 

Of course, if indeed this means that buying the most shorted stocks is no longer a “sustainable” strategy, that would be ok as it implies one small step toward returning to a normal, credible, non-manipulated market: something that both we and David Einhorn openly lament. Recall from David Einhorn’s Advice On How To Trade This Equity Bubble:

Finally, there are the market participants whose investment process appears to be “bet on whatever has made money most recently.” They’ve noticed that stocks with large short-interest ratios have materially outperformed over the last year and they continue to invest accordingly. When “high short interest” becomes a viable stock-picking strategy and conventional valuation methods no longer apply for many stocks, we can’t help but feel a sense of déjà vu. We never expected to find ourselves in an environment like this again, given the savings that were lost when the internet bubble popped.

Alas, we are smack in the middle of the same bubble once again, and will be until the Chairman keeps playing the musical chairs dance ever faster and faster until finally everyone drops dead.

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/y0v1kmZLu7w/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Not even Paul and John would have any clue what the message is or what is going on in this psychedelic, Yellow Subamrine-inspired TV ad slot for Obamacare titled “Fly With Your Own Wings”, part of the Cover Oregon campaign (funded by US taxpayers). Perhaps: enroll in Obamacare, get a lifetime supply of LSD for free…

 

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/ZuutNJ1KxP4/story01.htm Tyler Durden

It appeared the US dollar was bottoming in the first half of October.  We had noted the possibility of head and shoulders reversal patterns in sterling and the Swiss franc.   These proved for naught, and yet, it still appears the dollar is carving out a bottom. The technical tone for the greenback has improved in recent days.  

 

There has also been a  shift in the fundamental focus toward somewhat better news from the US and somewhat poorer news from Europe. There is mounting speculation that the European Central Bank will have to have some sort of policy response to the continued decline in private lending, weak growth in money supply, and near record low inflation. 

 

The Dollar Index, which despite the fact that it is not reflective of US trade flows (two of the US 4 largest trading partners, China and Mexico, are not included, and it is heavily weighted toward the euro and currencies that move in the euro’s orbit), many participants see it a rough-and-ready proxy for the US dollar in general.  The key technical development is that it finished last week above the downtrend line drawn off this year’s highs in early July and the bounce in early September.   

 

If that down move is being retraced, the next target for the Dollar Index is the 81.20 area and then the 81.75-90 area, which corresponds to a 61.8% retracement and the 200-day moving average.   We note that the RSI and MACDs suggest additional gains and the 5-day moving average has crossed above the 20-day average.  A move now much below 80.00 would cast doubt on this constructive outlook.  

 

For its part, the euro has not violated a similar trend line, drawn off the early July and Sept lows. On Monday it comes in near $1.3425.  That area also corresponds to a retracement objective.  By the end of the week it is closer to $1.3460.  The 5-day average has not cross below the 20-day average, but it most likely will on Monday.  The RSI and MACDs are moving lower. Assuming the trend line is convincingly violated, the next target would be in the $1.3300-35 area, which represents the next retracement objective and the 100-day moving average.  The 200-day moving average comes in closer to $1.3270.  Given the magnitude of the decline in recent days, it probably requires a move back above the $1.3600-50 area to negate this bearish technical view. 

 

The dollar has also not violated its similar downtrend against the Swiss franc.  That trend line comes in near CHF0.9180 at the start of the new week, which corresponds to last month’s high, and finishes the week near CHF0.9150. The 5- and 20-day moving averages have not crossed, but they are poised to on Monday.   Once the trend line goes, the immediate objective is near CHF0.9220.  It will ultimately take a break of the CHF0.9420-50 area to raise confidence that a low of some import is in place.  

 

The dollar posted an outside up-day against the yen and the premium the US pays over Japan (on 10-year government paper) widened back above 200 bp for the first time since mid-October.   The technical tone is constructive, but within the context of the broad trading range conditions that have prevailed for five months now.   The dollar has been making lower highs and higher lows against the yen since the middle of Q2.  Last month’s high was near JPY99.00 and this represents the next target.  However, even a move a bit higher, even a little of JPY100, wouldn’t violate 5-month only trading range.  A move above September high near JPY100.60, though would suggest something more important is taking place technically.   The weekly technical readings warn of the upside risks to the dollar against the yen.  

 

Sterling appears to have carved out a double top (reversal pattern) in October, with gains in early and late in the month, stalling out near $1.6260.  It depends on how one draws the neck line, but it can be found in the $1.5890-$1.5915 area.  The pre-weekend low was near $1.5910.   A convincing break of the neck line, perhaps encouraged by accumulating evidence that the data is no longer surprising the market on the upside, would suggest potential toward the mid-$1.5500 area, which also roughly corresponds to a 50% retracement of the rally from the July lows near $1.4800. The 5-day moving average crossed below the 20-day before the weekend and the technical indicators are weak.   Resistance now is pegged in the $1.6040-70 area. 

 

The Australian dollar posted a key downside reversal on October 23, after poking through the 50% retracement of this year’s decline, and has not looked back since. The 5- and 20-day moving averages crossed in the second half of last week.  MACDs are have turned lower, but the RSI is not generating a strong signal.  A break of the $0.9430 area would target the $0.9325 area, though the real technical test may not come until closer to $0.9225.  If this correction in the Aussie is indeed over, the $0.9480-$0.9520 area should hold back stronger gains.  

 

The Canadian dollar is the only major currency to have gained against the US dollar last week (~0.25%).   Yet the Canadian dollar is not very inspiring.  It has been in a broad range for several months.  The US dollar has found demand near CAD1.02 and supply near CAD1.06.  The technical indicators are not generating strong signals.  Look for narrow CAD1.0350-CAD1.0450 range to dominate until toward the end of the week.  Both countries report Oct employment data on Nov 8.  

 

The US dollar is likely to push higher against the Mexican peso.  The 5- and 20-day moving averages are set to cross on Monday and, while the RSI is neutral, the MACDs are turning higher. A downtrend line drawn off the early Sept and early Oct highs comes in near MXN13.20 and this is a reasonable near-term objective.   If this near-term view is valid, the greenback should spend little if any time below MXN12.96.

 

 

Observations from the speculative positioning in the CME currency futures:

 

1.  There were mostly minor position adjustments in the most recent reporting week that ended October 29.   Of the 14 gross positions we track, 12 changed by less than 6k contracts, and of those, a third were less than 1k contracts.  Two gross positions were adjusted by more than 10k contracts:  long euros were added to while long yen positions were cut.  

 

2.  The gross long euro position came with spitting distance of the record high set in April 2007. Many observers focus on the net position, which will fail to reveal how large of a speculative long position has been accumulated.  The cut in the gross long yen position, almost in half from the previous week, is the smallest since March 2012.  

 

3.  In the week ending Oct 29, the gross long currency positions generally grew, with the yen and sterling being the exceptions.  There was a less of a pattern among the currency shorts, except to note the position adjustments were minor.  

 

4.  The net long sterling and Swiss franc positions are the largest since the start of the year, but were little changed from the previous period.  The net short Australian dollar position is the smallest since May.  

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/Mta4Kjb6GCE/story01.htm Marc To Market

What is the common element between Liborgate, the Fed manipulating capital markets, China hoarding gold, and the recent ubiquotous NSA spying revelations? At one point, before they became fact, they were all “conspiracy theories” as were the Freemasons, the Illuminati, McCarthy’s witch hunts, 9/11, and so many more. The same theories, which – don’t laugh – are now part of a Cambridge University study titled Conspiracy and Democracy,  which looks at the prevalence of conspiracy theories and what they tell us about trust in democratic societies, about the differences between cultures and societies, and why conspiracy theories (ostensibly before they become fact) appear at particular moments in history. But, at its core, whether conspiracy theories will, as the BBC summarizes, it, eventually destroy democracy.

Because, supposedly, it is not the corruption at the top echelons of government, the ultimate usurpation of power by assorted globalist money groups “never letting a crisis go to waste”, that plunder wealth from what is left of the middle class and hands it over, via latent inflation, asset bubbles and capital appreciation to the 1% peak of society’s wealth pyramid (in the US), or kleptofascist, unelected bureaucratic groups seeking the “greater good” despite the complete tear of the social fabric (in Europe) that is a threat to democracy.

No – you see it is evil conspiracy theories and the theorists that spin them that are the biggest threat to the “democratic” way of life.

The BBC has more on this amusing, if potentially troubling, avenue:

“The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire,” says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton. It would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as “swivel-eyed loons,” with “poor personal hygiene and halitosis,” he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate. They are not all “crazy”. The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.

 

Mr Naughton is one of three lead investigators in a major new Cambridge University project to investigate the impact of conspiracy theories on democracy.

 

The internet is generally assumed to be the main driving force behind the growth in conspiracy theories but, says Mr Naughton, there has been little research into whether that is really the case. He plans to compare internet theories on 9/11 with pre-internet theories about John F Kennedy’s assassination.

 

Like the other researchers, he is wary, or perhaps that should be weary, of delving into the darker recesses of the conspiracy world.

 

“The minute you get into the JFK stuff, and the minute you sniff at the 9/11 stuff, you begin to lose the will to live,” he told the audience in Cambridge.

 

Like Sir Richard Evans, who heads the five-year Conspiracy and Democracy project, he is at pains to stress that the aim is not to prove or disprove particular theories, simply to study their impact on culture and society.

Impact on culture and society… and then judge: because if heaven forbid the fabled institution of higher learning that is Cambridge – the progenitor of many a statist thinkers – finds that conspiracy theories are a danger to fine, upstanding, democratic society… then what?

Why are we so fascinated by them? Are they undermining trust in democratic institutions?

No, but a far better question is do conspiracy “theories”, at least until confirmed, simply provide the beholder with a far more skeptical view of a world than the one spoon fed by a complicit media, whose sole purpose is to perpetuate and multiply – hence enrich – the advertising dollars of the status quo? And is the long overdue questioning of everything that emanates from institutions of power a bad thing, or were people simply too lazy to think for themselves and let the government do it, at least until said “cognitive outsourcing” led to the second great depression of 2008?

David Runciman, professor of politics at Cambridge University, the third principal investigator, is keen to explode the idea that most conspiracies are actually “cock-ups”.

 

“The line between cock-up, conspiracy and conspiracy theory are much more blurred than the conventional view that you have got to choose between them,” he told the Festival of Ideas.

 

“There’s a conventional view that you get these conspirators, who are these kind of sinister, malign people who know what they are doing, and the conspiracy theorists, who occasionally stumble upon the truth but who are on the whole paranoid and crazy. “Actually the conspirators are often the paranoid and crazy conspiracy theorists, because in their attempt to cover up the cock-up they get drawn into a web in which their self-justification posits some giant conspiracy trying to expose their conspiracy.

“And I think that’s consistently true through a lot of political scandals, Watergate included.”

Such a “complex” and profoundly introspective theory – truly something only a Cambridge professor could come up with.

[Runciman] is also examining whether the push for greater openness and transparency in public life will fuel, rather than kill off, conspiracy theories.

 

“It may be that one of the things conspiracy theories feed on as well as silence, is a surfeit of information. And when there is a mass of information out there, it becomes easier for people to find their way through to come to the conclusion they want to come to.

 

“Plus, you don’t have to be an especial cynic to believe that, in the age of open government, governments will be even more careful to keep secret the things they want to keep secret. “The demand for openness always produces, as well as more openness, more secrecy.”

You mean… like the NSA spying on everyone to be abreast of just what everyone knows?

Or does that mean that the Fed’s faux transparency affair is nothing but a red herring designed to redirect attention from the Fed’s true intentions somewhere else?

Unpossible.

That said, having been accused of a conspiratorial bent on a few occasions, we kinda, sorta see where this is going, and will go so far as to venture that in a few years, the Cambridge study’s conclusions (which certainly will cast all paranoid and crazy conspirators in a culpable light and worth of “social isolation”), will be escalated to enforce that anyone found of harboring “conspiratorial” thoughts will be bound and shackled in whatever WIFI-free dungeon the local host Big Brother government has created precisely for this ulterior subclass of humans.

But for now – conspire away… and upon exposing the deep lies beneath the surface of “democracy” – since the mainstream media simply refuses to be painted in the same paranoid and crazy brush – remember to promptly depart for the “evil undemocratic empire” that is Russia…

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/zPB9MYE-kf8/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Submitted by Michael Krieger of Liberty Blitzkrieg

Top U.S. Hospitals Are Opting Out Of Obamacare

In the off chance you are actually able to access the website and successfully sign up for the epic disaster that is Obamacare, you might be a bit surprised about your options when you actually encounter a medical issue. Every American that is even considering signing up for this nightmare needs to be aware of the disturbing fact that many of the top hospitals in the nation will not be accepting Obamacare related insurance plans. Even worse, in many cases it is virtually impossible to find out which doctors and hospitals are on your plan.

One of the most egregious examples of failure is the following:

Seattle Children’s Hospital ranks No. 11 on the U.S. News & World Report best pediatric hospital list. When Obamacare rolled out, the hospital found itself with just two out of seven insurance companies on Washington’s exchange.

Seattle Children’s is the only pediatric hospital in King County, and offers keys services, such as cancer care, which are not available anywhere else in the region. So if you sign up for Obamacare, good luck surviving. Fortunately, that represents only about six people at the moment.

More from U.S. News:

Americans who sign up for Obamacare will be getting a big surprise if they expect to access premium health care that may have been previously covered under their personal policies. Most of the top hospitals will accept insurance from just one or two companies operating under Obamacare.

Watchdog.org looked at the top 18 hospitals nationwide as ranked by U.S. News and World Report for 2013-2014. We contacted each hospital to determine their contracts and talked to several insurance companies, as well.

The result of our investigation: Many top hospitals are simply opting out of Obamacare.

Chances are the individual plan you purchased outside Obamacare would allow you to go to these facilities. For example, fourth-ranked Cleveland Clinic accepts dozens of insurance plans if you buy one on your own. But go through Obamacare and you have just one choice: Medical Mutual of Ohio.

Consumers, too, will struggle with the new system. Many exchanges don’t even list the insurance companies on their web sites. Some that do, like California, don’t provide names of doctors or hospitals.

Continue reading ?

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/OFl2T2mNhds/story01.htm Tyler Durden

There has been much media insinuation in recent months that just because Spain’s economy has virtually shuttered, and imports have slid to unprecedented low levels in the process pushing the (adjusted) GDP beancount positive for the first time in 3 years, that things are somehow getting better. What the media has roundly ignored is that as a result of the collapse in consumption and end demand, courtesy of an unemployment rate that at least according to Eurostat just rose to a new record high, the companies that actually operate in Spain and form the basis for any real economic growth, are shuttering at an unprecedented pace. Of note: Spanish electrical appliance maker Fagor, which employs 5,700 people worldwide, or in a few shorts months, employed, is one step closer to bankruptcy after its Polish subsidiary filed for protection from its creditors. The company, which claims to be the fifth-biggest electrical appliance company in Europe, had trading of its debt suspended after its mother firm – private Spanish conglomerate Mondragon – refused to pour in money to rescue the company.

Fagor makes washing machines, refrigerators and other appliances at 13 factories in five countries. Or, in a few shorts months, made.

AFP reports:

Spain’s financial market regulator said Fagor Electrodomesticos’s debt was suspended from the fixed-interest market on Thursday morning as a precaution “owing to circumstances which could disturb normal trade” in its securities. Shortly afterwards, the regulator said Fagor’s Polish subsidiary, Fagor Mastercook, had voluntarily filed for bankruptcy protection. It employs 1,400 people at its factory in Wroclaw, southwestern Poland. The Polish offshoot’s filing at a court in the northern Spanish city of San Sebastian did not affect the status of the parent Fagor Electromesticos, which is part of the sprawling Basque cooperative Mondragon.

 

But it raised fears among Fagor workers in the Basque country, where the company says it employs 2,000 people directly and supports the same number of jobs indirectly.

 

Workers planned a demonstration on Thursday evening in San Andres, the remote Basque town where the company is based.

 

Fagor announced on October 16 that it had launched initial proceedings towards bankruptcy protection while it tried to refinance its debt, which a source within the company said was 800 million euros ($1.1 billion).

 

Under Spanish bankruptcy rules, Fagor has four months from that date to try to raise funds, but the source told AFP its fate could be determined much sooner in the absence of financing from Mondragon.

 

“If there is no change in the corporation’s decision, the company will have to enter bankruptcy proceedings. I don’t know if that will be within one week or two, but it will be in the short term.”

But while defaults are normal things, at least in the Old Normal economy, when failure was allowed, what is troubling is that Fagor’s parent company refused to preserve the firm’s viability in exchange for a tiny liquidity injection of just €170 million.

Fagor has said 170 million euros would be enough to save it and warned that a lack of financing would push it to an “imminent bankruptcy request”. But Mondragon said in a statement late on Wednesday that it felt Fagor, which has suffered a prolonged period of falling sales, “the company no longer responds to market needs, and the financial resources it requests would not ensure its business future”.

 

Fagor posted sales of 1.17 billion euros in 2012, a drop of over one-third since 2007, a year before Spain’s sharp economic downturn began with the collapse of a decade-long property bubble.

 

The company operates with 10 brands in 130 countries worldwide, and has 13 factories in Spain, France, Poland, Morocco and China. It has a market share of 16.3 percent in Spain and of 14.2 percent in France.

 

The Mondragon group was founded in the 1950s by a local priest, Jose Maria Arizmendiarrieta, as a small workers’ cooperative and is now an international conglomerate with a mission of maintaining jobs. Its various branches, present in 20 countries, include industry, distribution and finance.

 

Despite its international presence, Mondragon’s cooperative structure has kept most of its jobs and production at home, with 35,000 employees in the Spanish Basque Country, 35,000 elsewhere in Spain and about 13,500 abroad.

And since bankruptcy now appears inevitable, that is up to 70,000 former Spanish jobs that will very soon be on the streets, protesting and enjoying the Spanish “recovery.”

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/i3cRH02HYmM/story01.htm Tyler Durden

There has been much media insinuation in recent months that just because Spain’s economy has virtually shuttered, and imports have slid to unprecedented low levels in the process pushing the (adjusted) GDP beancount positive for the first time in 3 years, that things are somehow getting better. What the media has roundly ignored is that as a result of the collapse in consumption and end demand, courtesy of an unemployment rate that at least according to Eurostat just rose to a new record high, the companies that actually operate in Spain and form the basis for any real economic growth, are shuttering at an unprecedented pace. Of note: Spanish electrical appliance maker Fagor, which employs 5,700 people worldwide, or in a few shorts months, employed, is one step closer to bankruptcy after its Polish subsidiary filed for protection from its creditors. The company, which claims to be the fifth-biggest electrical appliance company in Europe, had trading of its debt suspended after its mother firm – private Spanish conglomerate Mondragon – refused to pour in money to rescue the company.

Fagor makes washing machines, refrigerators and other appliances at 13 factories in five countries. Or, in a few shorts months, made.

AFP reports:

Spain’s financial market regulator said Fagor Electrodomesticos’s debt was suspended from the fixed-interest market on Thursday morning as a precaution “owing to circumstances which could disturb normal trade” in its securities. Shortly afterwards, the regulator said Fagor’s Polish subsidiary, Fagor Mastercook, had voluntarily filed for bankruptcy protection. It employs 1,400 people at its factory in Wroclaw, southwestern Poland. The Polish offshoot’s filing at a court in the northern Spanish city of San Sebastian did not affect the status of the parent Fagor Electromesticos, which is part of the sprawling Basque cooperative Mondragon.

 

But it raised fears among Fagor workers in the Basque country, where the company says it employs 2,000 people directly and supports the same number of jobs indirectly.

 

Workers planned a demonstration on Thursday evening in San Andres, the remote Basque town where the company is based.

 

Fagor announced on October 16 that it had launched initial proceedings towards bankruptcy protection while it tried to refinance its debt, which a source within the company said was 800 million euros ($1.1 billion).

 

Under Spanish bankruptcy rules, Fagor has four months from that date to try to raise funds, but the source told AFP its fate could be determined much sooner in the absence of financing from Mondragon.

 

“If there is no change in the corporation’s decision, the company will have to enter bankruptcy proceedings. I don’t know if that will be within one week or two, but it will be in the short term.”

But while defaults are normal things, at least in the Old Normal economy, when failure was allowed, what is troubling is that Fagor’s parent company refused to preserve the firm’s viability in exchange for a tiny liquidity injection of just €170 million.

Fagor has said 170 million euros would be enough to save it and warned that a lack of financing would push it to an “imminent bankruptcy request”. But Mondragon said in a statement late on Wednesday that it felt Fagor, which has suffered a prolonged period of falling sales, “the company no longer responds to market needs, and the financial resources it requests would not ensure its business future”.

 

Fagor posted sales of 1.17 billion euros in 2012, a drop of over one-third since 2007, a year before Spain’s sharp economic downturn began with the collapse of a decade-long property bubble.

 

The company operates with 10 brands in 130 countries worldwide, and has 13 factories in Spain, France, Poland, Morocco and China. It has a market share of 16.3 percent in Spain and of 14.2 percent in France.

 

The Mondragon group was founded in the 1950s by a local priest, Jose Maria Arizmendiarrieta, as a small workers’ cooperative and is now an international conglomerate with a mission of maintaining jobs. Its various branches, present in 20 countries, include industry, distribution and finance.

 

Despite its international presence, Mondragon’s cooperative structure has kept most of its jobs and production at home, with 35,000 employees in the Spanish Basque Country, 35,000 elsewhere in Spain and about 13,500 abroad.

And since bankruptcy now appears inevitable, that is up to 70,000 former Spanish jobs that will very soon be on the streets, protesting and enjoying the Spanish “recovery.”

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/i3cRH02HYmM/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Two months ago we reported that Obama had officially declared war on the weather, after it was reported that he was ready to use “administrative authority” to fight climate change. While at the time it was not quite clear just what authority he had to unleash centrally-planned weather, today we finally got a glimpse of how Obama’s biggest war yet would look like.

As Washington Times reports, “President Obama issued an executive order Friday directing a government-wide effort to boost preparation in states and local communities for the impact of global warming. The action orders federal agencies to work with states to build “resilience” against major storms and other weather extremes. For example, the president’s order directs that infrastructure projects like bridges and flood control take into consideration climate conditions of the future, which might require building structures larger or stronger — and likely at a higher price tag.”

In other words, following the epic Syrian fiasco, whose primary intention was to boost the US budget deficit as a result of a localized war, and allow Bernanke more debt issues to monetize, Obama now has decided to unleash a very expensive, and very much debt-funded war against the greatest enemy of all: the weather.

The article goes on:

“The impacts of climate change — including an increase in prolonged periods of excessively high temperatures, more heavy downpours, an increase in wildfires, more severe droughts, permafrost thawing, ocean acidification and sea-level rise — are already affecting communities, natural resources, ecosystems, economies and public health across the nation,” the presidential order said. “The federal government must build on recent progress and pursue new strategies to improve the nation’s preparedness and resilience.”

 

There’s no estimate of how much the additional planning will cost. Natural disasters including Superstorm Sandy cost the U.S. economy more than $100 billion in 2012, according to the administration.

Well, the more the merrier. Since interest costs in the New Normal are not an issue as long as the Marriner Eccles politburo is around, debt is wealth, and the more debt the US incurs to comply with Obama’s latest executive order, the better.

Sure enough, as a result of this idiotic development, it is best to have very lofty aspirations, of the variety that come in 9 or more digits: after all, since nobody can quantify “climate change” may as well unleash the most ridiculous numbers conceivable.

The White House is also setting up a task force of state and local leaders to offer advice to the federal government, with several Democratic governors having agreed to serve and at least one Republican governor, from the U.S. territory of Guam.

 

Mr. Obama has a goal of reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent by 2020, and the Environmental Protection Agency is working on rules that would impose tougher regulations on coal-burning power plants. But much of the president’s climate-change agenda has stalled in Congress, and the administration says the new order recognizes that global greenhouse gas emissions are still rising, making further damage from global warming inevitable.

Actually no:

But since when did an autocrat, whose only concern is pandering to his populist, Obamaphone-equipped electorate, while spying on the middle class and doing the bidding of Wall Street, care about the facts?

Finally:

“The question is not whether we need to act,” Mr. Obama said at the time. “The question is whether we will have the courage to act before it’s too late.”

Damn right: however the “action in question has nothing to do with spending trillions to prepare for a crisis that may come long after the Federal Reserve has destroyed western civilization, but rather to overthrow a corrupt, oligarchic, self-serving system, in which the middle-class, once the backbone of a great nation, is being forced into extinction by its “elected” representatives through the most subversive form of wealth transfer in the Fed’s 100 years of existence.

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/51_i2oXFKUw/story01.htm Tyler Durden

Click here to follow ZeroHedge in Real-time on FinancialJuice

There’s very little use in mapping a territory that has already been mapped, but there are times when it is done for other reasons. Maybe this time where the mapping of territory is going on it’s a question of atoning of one’s sins, making amends for offenses and errors in the mapping (or not, as we shall see). Just a few days ago Alan Greenspan’s latest piece of work was published (October 20th 2013). It’s entitled The Map and the Territory: Risk, Human Nature, and the Future of Forecasting. Although, that’s nothing new either. Greenspan steals the title of the French author Michel Houellebecq’s book The Map and the Territory, published in 2010 (translated into English in2012) that won the prestigious Prix Goncourt. The Goncourt is the prize for literature in France that is awarded to “the best and most imaginative prose of the year” by the Académie Goncourt. Perhaps Greenspan is in the running for themost imaginative prose of the year with his story of risk management and the irrationality of man.

Greenspan’s Mapping

Greenspan maps the territory of the lead-up to the financial crisis. He contemplates on the forming of bubbles and he explains just how and why he never actually saw the housing bubble coming; despite the fact that many had already warned him. Obviously the maxim about being forewarned and forearmed doesn’t hold with Mr. Greenspan; that fundamental principle was thrown to the wind long ago when he set up the foundations for the subprime crisis.

Wasn’t it Greenspan that suggested in a speech in 2004 that more people should take out adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) taking advantage of the historically low interest rates (1%) that he would then hike to over 5% within a couple of years, bringing many into sheer ruin? He (famously) stated “where once more-marginal applicants would simply have been denied credit, lenders are now able to quite efficiently judge the risk posed by individual applicants and to price that risk appropriately”. Obviously they weren’t able to do it appropriately enough. Who paid the price? No comment needed, Mr. Greenspan.

In Greenspan’s map he says the major mistake of those that didn’t see the crisis coming were because those people had considered society as being made up of rational decision makers. He says that people got it all wrong. Man is irrational. But, he adds that we are saved since we are irrational in predictable ways. That’s a contradiction in itself; wherefore the title of his work.

The Polish-American scientist Alfred Korzybski stated that a “map is not a territory”, meaning that we confuse maps with territories. In other words, we describe something (through drawing a map) but it is only a representation of reality and not the territory itself. It’s a shame that Greenspan has not realized that his own description, his own mapping of the territory of the subprime crisis in the book, is not going to take it away and it certainly won’t be anything more than his own cartographic charting of waters that have already been charted. Greenspan has confused the model of reality with reality itself; he has mapped the territory that he shouldn’t be mapping.

Now, Greenspan believes that it is possible to predict the irrational (unpredictable) behavior of investors and man in general. This is despite the fact that in a recent television interview Greenspan admitted that he knew of the subprime crisis in 2008. Wasn’t that when it had actually hit the real-estate fan big time? Greenspan refuses to apologize for believing that a “bubble in and of itself doesn’t give you a crisis”. Doesn’t it?

Greenspan obviously has very little to say on the subject and spends a single chapter on the predictable nature of irrationality. The rest is just economic history and story-telling; Mr. Greenspan’s representation of reality. Greenspan’s mapping blames (at least at first) the holder of the territory land title, the US government, for allowing the sub-primes to come into existence. He exonerates the Federal Reserve and absolves them of all guilt and condemnation in the prognosis of his personal version of the narrative.

Who’s to Blame

But, while he doesn’t openly admit the role that was played by the Federal Reserve he does state that the Fed played a major role in allowing capital levels to be set by the commercial banks themselves. The predictable nature of that irrational decision was largely obvious, wasn’t it, Mr. Greenspan?

“The accompanying dangers were not fully appreciated, even in the commercial banking sector”, he explains. But, it seems that he was turning a deaf ear (and so were the banks) to the worries that were being expressed by many at the time.

But, the real problem is not the Federal Reserve and it isn’t even the US government. The real problem for Greenspan is the overabundance of investment from foreign countries. The US saved less because they were getting money thrown at them from all over the world. It’s those foreign investors that are the problem. That at least tops it all and shows just to what extent Mr. Greenspan is entirely irrational and unpredictable. He has disproved his own theory, entirely plagiarized from others, but the territory that he maps does not describe the reality of the situation.

 

Alan Greenspan served as Chairman of the Federal Reserve of the US between 1987 and 2006 and he was appointed by President Ronald Reagan. When he retired in 2006 he had been the 2nd longest serving chairman of the Federal Reserve. On leaving the Fed he became a consultant and private advisor through Greenspan Associates LLC.

Originally posted: Greenspan Maps a Territory 

You might also enjoy: Gold Rush or Just a Streak? | Obama’s Obamacare: Double Jinx | Financial Markets: Negating the Laws of Gravity  |Blatant Housing-Bubble: Stating the Obvious | Let’s Downgrade S&P, Moody’s and Fitch For Once | US Still Living on Borrowed Time | (In)Direct Slavery: We’re All Guilty | The Nobel Prize: Do We Have to Agree? | Revolution Costs | Petrol Increase because Traders Can’t Read | Darfur: The Land of Gold(s) | Obamacare: I’ve Started So I’ll Finish | USA: Uncle Sam is Dead | Where Washington Should Go for Money: Havens | Sugar Rush is on | Human Capital: Switzerland or Yemen? |

Technical Analysis: Bear Expanding Triangle | Bull Expanding Triangle | Bull Falling Wedge | Bear Rising Wedge | High & Tight Flag

 

 

via Zero Hedge http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/zerohedge/feed/~3/KARJB3sjDo8/story01.htm Pivotfarm