Futures Rise As Oil Jumps, Yields Gain, Yen Tumbles

Futures Rise As Oil Jumps, Yields Gain, Yen Tumbles

Global stocks markets struggled for direction and US equity futures were flat in Monday’s quiet session following a rally Friday that pushed the Nasdaq 100 nearly 2% higher amid optimism that a soft landing for the world’s biggest economy is within reach. Sentiment was shaken by early weakness in Treasuries – which briefly pushed the 10Y yield to 4.0% after the BOJ was forced to intervene unexpectedly in the bond market one day after “tweaking” its YCC – continued strength in the USD (which sent the yen tumbling contrary to what virtually all so-called experts predicted), and a rally in commodities, and especially oil (and gasoline) which has soared in recent days.

As of 7:30am, US equity futures were 0.1% higher at 4,612 while Nasdaq futures were largely unchanged. Treasury yields edged higher, mirroring moves in UK and European bond markets. Gold drifted lower, while Brent climbed over $85 and to a level where markets will soon realize that headline inflation is about to storm right back; Bitcoin rose 0.3%. Apple and Amazon.com are among companies reporting earnings in the coming days.

The yen tumbled against the dollar, crushing the BOJ’s carefully laid plans to strengthen the currency, after the Bank of Japan announced unscheduled bond-purchase operations to buy debt. The BOJ was seeking to contain a selloff after it said Friday it will allow yields to rise above a 0.5% cap and JGBs promptly did just that. 

In premarket trading, Johnson & Johnson shares fall 1.5%, after a judge dismissed the pharmaceutical company’s second attempt at using a unit’s bankruptcy case to press tens of thousands of cancer victims to drop their lawsuits and accept an $8.9 billion settlement. Wells Fargo said the decision should not be a surprise, while Cantor Fitzgerald sees potential liabilities being manageable. Ford Motor dropped after the stock was cut to hold at Jefferies “with a heavy heart,” following results which saw worse-than-expected losses on electric vehicles and a “strategic wobble.” MetLife Inc. gained after Bloomberg News reported that Singapore insurer Great Eastern Holdings Ltd. is in talks to buy the company’s Malaysian venture. Here are some other notable premarket movers:

  • Although Adobe may be “late to the party,” there is now more clarity on AI-enabled products and a roadmap toward monetization, Morgan Stanley says in note as it upgrades the stock to overweight from equal-weight. The shares rise 2.2% in premarket trading.
  • Apellis Pharma rises 14% after the company said a review into its eye drug Syfovre showed that neither the product nor manufacturing issues caused the rare cases of patients experiencing severe inflammation following treatment.
  • Barnes & Noble Education rose as much as 23% after the campus-store chain said it entered into an agreement with its stakeholders and strategic partners on refinancing terms.
  • Carvana falls as much as 1.7% in premarket trading after Jefferies becomes the fourth brokerage to turn bearish on the stock this month. The analyst cut the recommendation on the online used-car dealer’s stock to underperform from hold, saying near-term profitability is inflated by transitory tailwinds.
  • General Electric fluctuates after Oppenheimer downgrades the stock to market perform from outperform, saying the share’s recent gains “align to fundamentals.”
  • MetLife rises as much as 4% after Bloomberg News reports that Singapore insurer Great Eastern Holdings is in talks to buy the company’s Malaysian venture.
  • Palantir Technologies shares rise as much as 5.7%, set to extend Friday’s 10% gain on growing optimism over the software firm’s exposure to AI.
  • Sweetgreen shares gain 7.2% after the fast-casual restaurant chain was upgraded to overweight from neutral at Piper Sandler. While it has been “tough sledding” for the company since going public, analysts Brian Mullan and Aisling Grueninger feel the “tide may be turning here a bit.”
  • Wayfair shares jump 5.3%, after the home-goods retailer was upgraded to overweight from neutral at Piper Sandler, which said the company is “on the cusp of driving sustained Ebitda profitability.”

In the world of confused central bankers, ECB President Christine Lagarde told Le Figaro newspaper the ECB could hike again, even if it pauses at its next meeting. In the US, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis President Neel Kashkari described the inflation outlook as “quite positive,” despite the likelihood of job losses and slower growth. Yields on German bonds and US Treasuries climbed.

The narrative that markets will be focused on is if it’s going to be a soft landing or not,” said Vivek Paul, senior portfolio strategist at BlackRock Investment Institute. “We’ll learn more about that once the upcoming data indicate if rapidly cooling inflation is indeed the start of a broader trend or it continues to be volatile.”

According to Mike Wilson, who in his latest weekly note once again refused to turn bearish thus assuring more stock market gains, was kind enough to explain again what is causing the rally he never saw coming: he suggests that US equities are tracking the same path they did in 2019, which was one of the best years for the S&P 500 over the past decade. The benchmark is set to close out a fifth month of gains, the longest such winning streak since August 2021.

“The data we have today suggests to us that we are in a policy-driven, late-cycle rally,” Wilson, a staunch equities bear, wrote in a note. The latest example of such a period occurred in 2019 when the Federal Reserve paused and then cut rates and its balance sheet expanded toward the end of the year. “These developments fostered a robust rally in equities that was driven almost exclusively by multiple and not earnings, as has been the case this year.”

Meanwhile, investors aren’t rushing to buy shares of companies that beat second-quarter profit estimates. These firms are still underperforming the S&P 500 Index by the most in 18 years on the day after results, according to Goldman chief equity strategist David Kostin. “Investors have not rewarded stocks posting positive surprises,” Kostin wrote in a note.

European stocks edged higher although the food & beverage sector has struggled after Heineken slumped as much as 6.4% after the Dutch brewer reduced its earnings forecast, with consumption waning as consumers react to price increases. The Stoxx 600 is up 0.2%. Here are the most notable European movers:

  • Erste Group shares gain as much as 2.5% after the Austrian lender reported what KBW says were a decent set of results and upgraded its guidance for a key profitability metric above consensus estimates
  • Galp shares rise as much as 3.5% to the highest intraday level since February after adjusted net income and Ebitda at the Portuguese energy company beat analyst estimates
  • Dr. Martens shares rise as much as 6.5% after Sky News reported that activist investment firm Sparta Capital has acquired a stake worth tens of millions of pounds in the UK bootmaker
  • Heineken shares slide as much as 6.4%, their steepest drop since October, after the Dutch brewer lowered its earnings guidance, having missed sales expectations in key markets such as Vietnam
  • Amadeus IT falls as much as 4.7%, extending its drop following Friday’s earnings, as Oddo downgrades the Spanish travel-booking services company to neutral
  • Nemetschek drops as much as 4.6% after 2Q results, with analysts highlighting the software firm’s weaker margins and noting that growth slowed at the segment that offers architecture planning and design tools
  • Hensoldt falls as much as 5.2%, extending Friday’s losses after it reported results that showed weakness in its Optronics division, even as overall order intake bounced back
  • Bollore declines as much as 3% after the French conglomerate reported 1H results that Oddo (neutral) says came in slightly lower than expected
  • Sage Group shares drop as much as 1.2% after the software company is downgraded to hold from buy at Canaccord Genuity, which says the stock needs “a breather after a banner year”

Earlier in the session, Asia’s benchmark equity gauge was headed for its highest close since April 2022 as heavyweight markets China and Japan rallied on domestic drivers. The MSCI Asia Pacific Index advanced as much as 1.1%, climbing for a sixth straight day in its longest streak of gains in three months. Chinese stocks led the region higher on increasing signs that Beijing is determined to shore up economic growth and boost the stock market. The country’s property gauge is set to enter a bull market as the latest China Mfg PMI print beat expectations, rising to 49.3 vs. 49.2 survey; and up from 49.0 previously. The rally in China also boosted MSCI’s key emerging markets index, with the measure on track for its highest close in 2023 on Monday.

“The last two years have reminded us of the unpredictability of market events and the power of mean reversion,” said Bryan Cheung, associate director for manager research at Morningstar. “Investors should rebalance their portfolios from areas that have gotten more expensive, like the tech sector, into more attractively valued areas such as value-tilted sectors and non-US markets like Asia and emerging markets.” Elsewhere, Japanese gauges climbed more than 1% as the yen weakened after the Bank of Japan announced unscheduled bond-purchase operations and following a tweak to its yield-curve control policy Friday. 

Asian stocks are poised to have their best month since January, amid improving prospects for the Chinese market, growing expectations of a soft landing in the US and the continued demand for artificial intelligence-linked shares. Still, the MSCI index’s gains are only about half that of the S&P 500. “Since last quarter, we have been recommending a balanced portfolio approach across Asia on one side chasing momentum in the region while also safeguarding against potential recession through high-yielding stocks,” Sanford C. Bernstein strategists including Rupal Agarwal wrote in a note. “We still find ample macro, valuation, earnings support” for these high-yielding names, they added.

Japan remains a focus for traders. On Friday, BOJ Governor Kazuo Ueda said the central bank would allow 10-year bond yields to rise above a ceiling it now calls a point of reference. The half-assed move, as is now widely understood, was meant not to signal normalization – as the BOJ is terrified what that would do to the bond market – but to boost the yen. Unfortunately, the latest YCC tweak has crashed and burned immediatley as the yen plunged after the Bank of Japan announced unscheduled bond-purchase operations to buy debt. The BOJ was seeking to contain a selloff after it said Friday it will allow yields to rise above a 0.5% cap.  

“We had the BOJ today making sure yields remained capped,” said Jane Foley, head of currency strategy at Rabobank. “They clearly don’t want yields rising too much, so today’s action drove home the point it was perhaps more of a technical adjustment than a change in policy.”

Australia’s ASX 200 lagged with strength in the commodity-related sectors offset by weakness in consumer stocks and financials, with the mood cautious ahead of tomorrow’s RBA rate decision where there is a discrepancy between money markets pricing and analysts’ median expectations on whether the central bank will hike or pause.

In FX, the Bloomberg Dollar Spot Index is up 0.1% while the Australian and New Zealand dollars are the best performers among the G-10’s. The yen plunged after the Bank of Japan announced unscheduled bond purchases, an indication that the dovish central bank isn’t yet ready to let yields soar. USD/JPY rose as much as 0.95% to 142.50, swinging from an intraday low of 140.70. BOJ said it would buy 300 billion yen ($2.1 billion) of five-to-10 year notes at market- level yields. On Friday, it said a previous yield ceiling of 0.5% for 10-year bonds is now a reference point rather than a limit, raising expectations it would let rates rise.

In rates, treasuries are slightly cheaper across the curve following rangebound Asia and early London sessions, while front-end outperforms slightly, steepening 2s10s spread by almost 2bp on the day. Downside pressure emerged during Asia session as Japanese bonds slid for a second day, prompting policy makers to step in to buy the notes. Japanese 10-year yields top 0.6% in Asia after the BOJ conducted an unscheduled bond-buying operation while the yen falls 0.9% versus the greenback. Bund futures are also lower although there was little reaction shown to euro-area CPI data. German 10-year yields are up 2bps. Treasuries also fall: US 10-year yields were around 3.96%, erasing an earlier spike to 4.0%, and cheaper by around 2bps vs Friday close with bunds and gilts trading broadly in line in the sector. Fed-dated OIS steady on the day with around 11bp of rate hike premium priced over the next two policy meetings, unchanged from Friday close. Monday’s few scheduled events include Fed’s Senior Loan Officer opinion survey release at 2pm New York time.

In commodities, crude futures advance with WTI rising 1%. Spot gold falls 0.3%.

Today’s macro data focus is SLOOS (which tends to precede moves in actual lending by ~2 quarters) and Chicago PMI.

Market Snapshot

  • S&P 500 futures up 0.2% at 4,614
  • STOXX Europe 600 little changed at 470.90
  • German 10Y yield little changed at 2.51%
  • Euro little changed at $1.1014
  • Brent Futures little changed at $84.93/bbl
  • MXAP up 0.2% to 170.37
  • MXAPJ up 0.3% to 540.44
  • Nikkei up 1.3% to 33,172.22
  • Topix up 1.4% to 2,322.56
  • Hang Seng Index up 0.8% to 20,078.94
  • Shanghai Composite up 0.5% to 3,291.04
  • Sensex up 0.4% to 66,425.08
  • Australia S&P/ASX 200 little changed at 7,410.42
  • Kospi up 0.9% to 2,632.58
  • Gold spot down 0.3% to $1,954.19
  • U.S. Dollar Index up 0.21% to 101.83

Top Overnight News

  • China signaled fresh efforts to boost consumption though stopped short of direct fiscal support, while major cities pledged to aid the property market. China’s NBS PMIs were mixed for July, with decent Manufacturing (49.3, up from 49 in June and ahead of the Street’s 48.9 forecast) but poor Non-manufacturing (51.5, down from 53.2 in June and below the Street’s 53 forecast). BBG / RTRS  
  • The Biden administration is hunting for malicious computer code it believes China has hidden deep inside the networks controlling power grids, communications systems and water supplies that feed military bases in the United States and around the world, according to American military, intelligence and national security officials. NYT
  • The US will provide Taiwan with $345mn in weapons, marking the first time the Pentagon will send arms directly to the country to boost its defenses amid rising concern about assertive Chinese military activity. FT
  • Lagarde said the ECB has made “great progress” in its fight against inflation and she called Q2 GDP numbers from Germany and Spain “quite encouraging”. RTRS
  • Europe’s July CPI was inline at +5.3% on the headline, but core came in a bit hotter at +5.5%, flat vs. June and above the Street’s +5.4% forecast. The core CPI in Europe really hasn’t descended that far from the peak of +5.7% in March. RTRS
  • Zelensky warns that “war is coming to Russia” after Moscow hit with drone attacks (“gradually, the war is returning to the territory of Russia, to its symbolic centers and military bases, and this is an inevitable, natural and absolutely fair process”). London Telegraph
  • Kashkari said the inflation outlook is “quite positive” and it “now appears the US will avoid a recession”, but he’s not sure the Fed is done hiking rates. RTRS
  • AI programs come under further scrutiny from content creators – websites, authors, and other content creators are increasingly demanding compensation from generative AI programs feeding off their work. WSJ
  • Blackstone’s BREIT is selling assets to raise liquidity for redemptions and to build data centers for the boom in AI computing demand. FT

A more detailed look at global markets courtesy of Newsquawk

Asian stocks headed into month-end mostly on the front foot as the region sustained last Friday’s tech-led momentum from Wall St and as participants digested the latest support efforts from China and mixed PMI data.     ASX 200 lagged with strength in the commodity-related sectors offset by weakness in consumer stocks and financials, with the mood cautious ahead of tomorrow’s RBA rate decision where there is a discrepancy between money markets pricing and analysts’ median expectations on whether the central bank will hike or pause. Nikkei 225 was boosted from the open and rose back above the 33,000 level amid a weaker currency and as markets digested the BoJ’s recent shift to a more flexible approach which provided early tailwinds for financials, while the central bank announced unscheduled bond purchases and participants also shrugged off disappointing Industrial Production data. Hang Seng and Shanghai Comp were higher amid stimulus-related optimism as Chinese officials are set to announce more measures for consumption, recovery and expansion, while the NDRC said it will solidly promote development and reform, as well as stick to the general principle of making economic stability a top priority. Furthermore, mixed official PMI data from China failed to dampen the mood in which headline Manufacturing PMI slightly topped forecasts but remained in contraction territory and Non-Manufacturing PMI disappointed with the slowest pace of increase since December 2022.

Top Asian News

  • China issued measures to recover and expand consumption including expanding consumption in NEVs and reasonably boosting consumption credit, while it will enhance financial support on consumption, according to a State Council document.
  • Chinese officials from several agencies will hold a press conference on Monday at 08:00BST/03:00EDT to announce more measures for consumption, recovery and expansion, according to Bloomberg.
  • China’s NDRC said it will solidly promote development and reform, as well as stick to the general principle of making economic stability a top priority and pursuing progress while ensuring stability, according to Xinhua.
  • Major Chinese cities including Beijing, Shenzhen and Guangzhou vowed to better meet rising housing needs after China’s housing minister called for more efforts to strengthen the property market with measures such as lowering payment requirements and mortgage rates for first-time homebuyers, according to Global Times.
  • Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng said at the China-France economic and financial dialogue that the Chinese side appreciates the French side’s decision to extend 5G licences in some cities to Huawei and the two sides will sign a cooperation agreement on grape cultivation and wine production. Furthermore, the two sides welcomed the recent trial certification of an Airbus (AIR FP) helicopter and aircraft, according to Reuters.
  • French Economic Minister Le Maire said China must remain a key partner for all European countries specifically France in tackling climate change and said they need China as a key partner for global growth, while he added that they are totally opposed to the idea of decoupling and want to get better access to Chinese markets, according to Reuters. Furthermore, Le Maire said the European car industry can withstand cheap Chinese EVs, according to FT.
  • Italy’s Defence Minister Crosetto said Italy made an improvised and atrocious decision when it joined China’s Belt and Road Initiative under a previous government in 2019, according to Reuters.
  • Alibaba (9988 HK) affiliate Ant Group’s listing is unlikely to occur in the short term, according to a Chinese state media report.
  • Japan’s Labour Ministry is reportedly proposing a record increase in the minimum hourly wage to lift it above JPY 1,000 to help low-income households tackle inflation, according to Bloomberg.
  • Japan LDP Senior Official Seko says BoJ policy tweak sends a message to exit from easing finally, according to Jiji; BoJ decision could throw cold water on the Japanese economy and needs high attention.
  • China’s NDRC Deputy Director says we should give full play to the decisive role in the market of resource allocation. Will improve long-term mechanisms for expanding household consumption.
  • China Commerce Ministry issues export controls on drone-related equipment; effective September 1st.

European bourses are mixed/steady around the unchanged mark on month-end, Euro Stoxx 50 +0.3%. Action which follows a mostly firmer APAC handover given Friday’s Wall St momentum and the latest Chinese stimulus, with mixed Chinese PMIs failing to offset the tone. Within Europe, sectors feature underperformance in Construction/Materials, perhaps after the latest HS2 update while Food, Beverage & Tobacco also lags after Heineken’s -6.0% Q2 update featuring downbeat sector commentary. Stateside, futures are essentially unchanged with specifics limited and the earning docket sparse in the pre-market ahead of a relatively busy PM agenda.

Top European News

  • UK’s financial regulator is under increasing pressure to overhaul rules governing the bank accounts for politicians amid the Farage ‘debanking’ fallout, according to FT.
  • ECB’s Lagarde reiterated that the ECB is to assess the situation on a meeting-by-meeting basis and a pause would not mean that there would not be any rate hikes after, while she also stated that Q2 GDP figures for France, Germany and Spain are encouraging, according to an interview in Le Figaro.
  • Bundesbank’s deputy head Claudia Buch said the ECB needs a more critical mindset on banks and warned the sector still faces significant risks from major macroeconomic upheaval, according to FT.

FX

  • The Dollar Index is kicking off the last trading day of July on the front foot and going against some month-end models, albeit likely on the back of BoJ-induced JPY weakness overnight.
  • JPY resides as the marked laggard following the BoJ’s back-door YCC tweak last week, which was undermined by an unscheduled JGB operation as the 10yr JGB yield topped 60bps.
  • Antipodeans are the standout outperformers amid Chinese stimulus optimism, with a string of recent reports suggesting China is focusing on its ailing domestic consumption, whilst China’s Manufacturing PMI marginally topping expectations could be providing some tailwinds.
  • EUR saw little reaction on the EZ Flash CPIs, which headline print in-line whilst core and super-core marginally topping forecast, with another inflation report due before the ECB’s next meeting.
  • PBoC set USD/CNY mid-point at 7.1305 vs exp. 7.1524 (prev. 7.1338)

Fixed Income

  • Core benchmarks are under pressure this morning with JGBs continuing their post-BoJ selling in APAC trade, which prompted Japan to step in with an unscheduled purchase; action which seemingly settled the complex.
  • EGBs are pressured with Bunds at the lower-end of 132.45-132.82 parameters while Gilts reside at the 95.47 trough which is 36 ticks above Friday’s base.
  • Bunds saw limited two-way action on the EZ Flash data points, ultimately settling around pre-release figures with market pricing little changed.
  • Periphery in-fitting but, as is often the case, slightly more contained with BTPs and Bonos digesting their own incremental updates.
  • USTs following suit to the above though a packed agenda ahead including Fed’s 2023 voter Goolsbee, the SLOOS and Treasury estimates ahead of Wednesday’s quarterly refunding.

Commodities

  • WTI and Brent futures have been trending higher since after the Chinese equities open overnight, with participants attributing the initial softness in prices to mixed Chinese PMIs, whilst the recovery has been partially pinned on continued Chinese efforts to boost its domestic consumption.
  • Spot gold is modestly softer amid the Dollar’s strength and ahead of this week’s key risk events including the BoE, US ISM PMIs, and the US Jobs Report. Spot gold sees its 100 DMA at USD 1,967.72 today and the DMA seen at 1,946.02/oz.
  • Base metals are mixed in tandem with the broader mood across the market. 3M LME copper has waned from best levels around USD 8,739/t to levels just under USD 8,700/t with the red metal underpinned by Chinese stimulus hopes. It’s also worth noting Chinese export controls on key chipmaking material will come into effect on Tuesday 1st August
  • Iran’s Oil Minister Owji said Tehran will pursue its rights in the Durra Field if other parties shun cooperation, according to Shana.
  • Russian President Putin said he agreed to have talks with Turkish President Erdogan on Wednesday and that a Turkish gas hub is still on the agenda, while he noted that they want to set up an electronic platform for gas sales in Turkey and don’t want to store gas there, according to Reuters.
  • Oman Crude OSP was calculated at USD 80.54/bbl for September (prev. USD 74.78/bbl August), according to DME data.
  • UK PM Sunak will today commit to going ahead with oil and gas exploration and production in the North Sea, according to the Times. Subsequently confirmed

Geopolitics

  • Russian President Putin said that they do not reject talks on Ukraine but noted a ceasefire is hard to implement when the Ukrainian army is on the offensive, while he added there should be agreement on both sides and that there are no significant changes on the Ukrainian front for now. Furthermore, Putin also commented that no one wants a direct clash between NATO and Russian forces in Syria and that the Russian Navy is to get 30 new ships this year, according to Reuters.
  • Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman said Russia has received around 30 peace initiatives on Ukraine, according to TASS.
  • Two skyscrapers in Moscow’s premier business district were damaged by drone strikes, while Moscow’s Mayor said Ukrainian drones caused damage although there were no casualties, according to FT.
  • Ukrainian President Zelensky has warned war is coming back to Russia following the drone attack on the Russian capital Moscow on Sunday, according to the BBC.
  • Ukrainian Chief of Staff said Ukraine will start negotiations on security guarantees with the US next week.
  • Polish PM Morawiecki said a group of Wagner mercenaries in Belarus have moved closer to the Polish border and may stage a ‘hybrid attack’ inside Poland, while he added that Wagner fighters may pose as migrants to enter the EU and that the situation is getting increasingly dangerous, according to Politico.
  • Russia’s embassy in Moldova announced it will temporarily stop providing appointments for consular matters in what Moldovan officials said is a situation linked to the order by the country’s officials to cut staff, according to Reuters.
  • Saudi Arabia will host a Ukrainian-organized peace summit in early August in an effort to find a way to start negotiations over the war in Ukraine, according to an official cited by Politico. Furthermore, it was reported that Ukraine, Brazil, India and South Africa are expected to attend but Russia is not.
  • US Secretary of State Blinken said China has repeatedly assured the US that it is not providing material, lethal assistance in Ukraine.
  • US President Biden’s administration believes China implanted malware in key US power and communications networks in a ‘ticking time bomb’ that could disrupt the military in the event of a conflict or if China were to move against Taiwan, according to NYT.
  • US is to provide Taiwan with military aid of up to USD 345mln, according to the White House.
  • Senior Israeli lawmaker said it is too early to speak of a Saudi normalisation deal being in the works, according to Reuters.

Crypto

  • SEC reportedly asked Coinbase (COIN) to halt trading in everything aside from Bitcoin prior to suing the exchange, according to the CEO cited by FT.

US Event Calendar

  • 09:45: July MNI Chicago PMI, est. 43.3, prior 41.5
  • 10:30: July Dallas Fed Manf. Activity, est. -22.5, prior -23.2
  • 14:00: Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices

Central Banks

  • 09:20: Fed’s Goolsbee Speaks on Yahoo! Finance Live

DB’s Jim Reid concludes the overnight wrap

Given that the outcome of the September FOMC (19th-20th) will likely depend on the two CPIs and two payroll reports prior to the meeting, all roads this week lead to US payrolls on Friday. Ahead of that tomorrow JOLTs data will give clues as to the current tightness of the labour market underneath the headline numbers. For those of us who still believe old fashioned metrics of the cycle matter, then the quarterly Fed SLOOS later today could actually be the most informative for where the economy might be in 6-12 months. We also have the manufacturing (tomorrow) and services (Thursday) ISMs as a timely indicator of the momentum in the US economy.

Today’s Eurozone CPI and GDP prints will also be closely watched after the German and French prints on Friday. With the ECB now as data dependent as the Fed, these releases take on added significance ahead of their September 14th meeting.

Stand by also for a marginal 25bps vs 50bps BoE meeting on Thursday (DB at 25bps) and another close call for the RBA tomorrow where a 25bps hike is expected against no change. Another packed week for corporate earnings will feature names including Apple, Amazon (both Thursday), AMD (tomorrow) and Qualcomm (Wednesday). Otherwise, 169 S&P 500 and 87 Stoxx 600 companies will be reporting this week.

Going through some of the key releases now and starting with payrolls. While our economists expect some payback from state and local government education hiring for the headline print (+175k forecast, consensus at +200k vs. +209k previously), they expect a slight pick up in private (+175k vs. +149k) payrolls inline with consensus. This would be below the three-month averages for headline (+244k) and private (+196k) payrolls gains. Watch out for average hourly earnings and hours worked as well. Also keep an eye out for the unpredictable and less reliable ADP (Wednesday). Last month’s +497k blew away all forecasts, and led to a yield sell-off, but this week our economists are expecting a more normal +175k.

Unit labour costs and productivity numbers on Thursday will also be in focus following the GDP and ECI data last week. Our team forecasts preliminary Q2 growth in productivity to come in at +1.1% following a -2.1% print previously. Unit labour costs are seen moderating from +4.2% to +2.6%.

Our UK economist Sanjay Raja previews the BoE meeting on Thursday here. He expects a +25bps hike taking the Bank Rate to 5.25%, although it is a close call between that and +50bps. Beyond next week’s decision, Sanjay sees two more +25bps hikes, with rate cuts potentially starting from Q2-24. The central bank’s Decision Maker Panel survey will be out that day as well.

In Europe, the main events will be today with the July flash CPI and Q2 GDP prints for the euro area. Country prints out on Friday have already given a good sense of the direction of travel. July inflation came in at +6.5% in Germany, (+6.6% exp), +5.1% in France (+5.0% exp) and +2.1% in Spain (+1.6% exp). Our European economists now see euro area headline inflation tracking at a low +5.4% (consensus +5.3%), and at +5.5% for core (consensus +5.4%). This would be the lowest headline inflation since January 2022, but with core inflation only a couple of tenths below its peak this March. Meanwhile, our economists now expect a +0.3% qoq Q2 GDP print (with risks tilted to +0.4%), though the upside versus consensus (+0.2%) is mostly due a distorted +3.3% print in Ireland last Friday. Elsewhere, growth disappointed in Germany, stagnating in Q2 (0.0% qoq vs +0.1% exp) after the technical recession seen during the winter. But it was stronger in France (+0.5% vs +0.1% exp) and Spain (+0.4% qoq, in line with exp).

After the official China PMI earlier today (more below), we see the Caixin indicators for manufacturing (tomorrow) and services (Thursday) to further enhance our understanding of the current state of the Chinese economy as we wait for fresh stimulus announcements. Our Chief China economist recaps last Monday’s Politburo meeting and highlights its market implications here.

In earnings, with around half of the S&P 500 companies having already reported results, all eyes will be on Apple and Amazon, releasing earnings Thursday. Elsewhere in tech, AMD and Qualcomm will be closely watched when it comes to chips. Uber, Shopify and PayPal also report. See Binky Chadha’s review of the strong reporting season so far here.

Asian equity markets are rallying this morning following Friday’s gains on Wall Street. As I check my screens, the Nikkei (+1.54%) is leading gains with the Hang Seng (+1.37%), the KOSPI (+0.80%), the CSI (+0.78%) and the Shanghai Composite (+0.49%) also higher. S&P 500 (-0.15%) and NASDAQ 100 (-0.22%) futures are slightly lower. Meanwhile, yields on 10yr USTs (+3.79 bps) have edged higher trading at 3.99% as we go to print.

Data from China showed that the official manufacturing activity contracted for the fourth straight month as the manufacturing PMI came in at 49.3 in July (v/s 48.9 expected) and compared to a reading of 49.0 in June. Meanwhile, the official non-manufacturing PMI dropped to 51.5 in July (v/s 53.0 expected) from a level of 53.2 in June, marking its lowest reading this year thus highlighting that the world’s second biggest economy is struggling to revive growth momentum amid soft global demand. There is encouraging stimulus talk though, hence the equity rally this morning. Elsewhere in Japan monthly activity data was a bit mixed. Retail sales contracted -0.4% m/m in June (v/s -0.7% expected), against the prior month’s upwardly revised +1.4% increase. Meanwhile, industrial output rebounded +2.0% m/m in June (v/s +2.4% expected, -2.2% in May).

The BOJ earlier announced an unscheduled Japanese Government Bond (JGB) purchase operation as yields on the 10yr JGBs rose to a fresh nine-year high of 0.607% before moving back to 0.587% after the BOJ’s surprise decision. They bought 300 billion yen ($2.1 billion) of 5-to-10 year notes at market yields. Meanwhile, the Japanese yen has given back most of its post BOJ gains after Friday’s YCC tweak and is currently trading at 141.81 versus the dollar.

Looking back on last week now, after the short, sharp risk-off as a result of the BoJ YCC surprise, a positive mood returned to markets on Friday as several US economic data releases added to optimism that the world’s largest economy could achieve a soft landing yet. The first release was the US June core PCE price index, which rose 4.1% year-on-year, below the anticipated 4.2%. In month-on-month terms, this was at 0.2% (as expected), down from 0.3% in the previous month, adding support to the narrative of softening inflation that had picked up pace following the US CPI data release earlier in the month. Building on this, the US employment cost index for Q2 increased 1.0% (vs 1.1% expected), another piece of evidence for the decelerating inflation story. On the back of the data, market pricing for the chances of another Fed hike by November (around terminal timing) eased to 37% (from 40% on Thursday), but this was still up from 33% a week earlier.

Against the backdrop of a potential soft landing, US 10yr Treasuries rallied on Friday, as yields fell -4.9bps, but were still up +11.4bps in weekly terms. 2yr yields followed suite, falling -5.3bps on Friday, but this time reversing much of their rise earlier in the week (+3.5bps week-on-week).

Over in Europe, 10yr bund yields gained +2.6bps week-on-week (and +2.0bps on Friday). However, 2yr bunds rallied by -4.2bps on Friday as ECB rate expectations moved lower with ECB commentary consistent with a slightly dovish take on the ECB meeting the previous day. A 44% chance of a 25bp hike is now priced in for September, the first time this has been below 50% since mid-June.

The US fixed income rally on Friday was a partial reversal of the sell off late on Thursday that came after a Nikkei report that the Bank of Japan may make changes to its YCC policy, a move confirmed by the BoJ on Friday as it effectively moved the upper end the YCC band to +1%. The change was seen as an initial step towards policy normalisation in Japan, though BoJ’s Ueda said he did not expect long-term yields to rise to 1%. Against this backdrop, the Nikkei fell -0.40% on Friday, but this failed to erase the week’s gains of +1.41%, its largest weekly up move since mid-June. Yields on 10-year Japanese government bonds jumped to their highest level since 2014, climbing +11.8bps on the week to 0.57%. However, the FX market response saw the yen reversing its earlier gains after a volatile day, closing the day lower at 141.16, virtually in line with its pre-Nikkei story level, having traded just above 138 early on Friday.

Equities rallied on Friday off the back of the positive US economic data. The S&P 500 gained +1.01% week-on-week, and +0.99% on Friday as 9 out of the 11 major constituent sectors rallied, securing its third consecutive week of gains. The NASDAQ relatively outperformed, gaining +1.90% week-on-week (and +2.02% on Friday), with outperformance by the tech megacaps. The STOXX 600 likewise gained +1.16% on the week in its third consecutive week of gains, although the rally stumbled on Friday with the index closing down -0.20%.

Finally, turning to commodities, oil recorded another weekly gain. Brent crude rose +0.89% on Friday, with a weekly increase of +4.84% to $84.99/bbl, buoyed by the improving growth outlook for the US and China’s recent pledge to boost stimulus. This marks its fifth weekly rise in a row, with Brent up +17.6% since 27 June. WTI crude was similarly up +4.55% on the week, to $80.58/bbl (and +0.61% on the week).

Tyler Durden
Mon, 07/31/2023 – 08:13

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/BVozORD Tyler Durden

The Federal Reserve has $910 billion in losses

The Federal Reserve– the most critically important central bank in the world– is completely, hopelessly insolvent.

This isn’t some wild conspiracy theory or overly dramatic interpretation of the facts; we’re extremely data-focused in this organization and base our conclusions on indisputable, open-source figures .

And the facts in this case are crystal clear: the Fed’s own financial statements show that their unrealized losses amount to over $910 billion. Given that the Fed only has $42 billion in capital, this means that America’s central bank has a net financial position of MINUS $868 billion on a mark-to-market basis.

To understand why, we need a quick review of how bonds work.

Most people understand pretty intuitively how investing in stocks works. Share prices fluctuate up and down every day.

Bonds are the same way. They also have prices which fluctuate day-to-day, month-to-month, and year-to-year, just like stocks.

And one of the biggest influences on bond prices is interest rates.

In fact, the cardinal rule in the bond market is that when interest rates go up, bond prices fall.

And this makes sense when you think about it. If you own a bond that pays 1%… but suddenly interest rates rise to 10%… then the market value of your 1% bond is going to fall.

After all, why would anyone buy a bond paying 1% if they can buy a brand new bond paying 10%?

Well, at the start of the pandemic, the Federal Reserve slashed interest rates to zero. And as a result, yields on US treasuries were so low they even went negative for a short time.

Banks, large corporations, and even the Fed itself bought trillions of dollars worth of bonds at these record low interest rates.

But over the past 16 months, interest rates have risen dramatically. And this means that everybody who bought bonds at record low interest rates during the pandemic is now sitting on deep unrealized losses. And that includes the Federal Reserve.

This is exactly what happened to Silicon Valley Bank several months ago.

Silicon Valley Bank had acquired more than $100 billion worth of bonds— much of that during the pandemic at record low rates. But when interest rates increased, SVB’s bond portfolio plummeted in value; they racked up huge losses and eventually went bust.

When I wrote about this several months ago, I said clearly that if SVB is insolvent, so is everyone else, including the Fed.

Now we know the truth: taking into consideration its unrealized losses, the Fed is insolvent by $868 billion. And if they keep raising rates as they did last week, the insolvency will continue to grow.

The natural question to ask is, if the Fed is insolvent, why hasn’t the financial system crashed?

Simple: the financial system is based on perception and confidence rather than reality.

And Silicon Valley Bank is instructive here yet again.

SVB went bust in March 2023. But it was insolvent as far back as late 2022. SVB was sending financial data to the FDIC and Federal Reserve back in December showing huge unrealized losses. But nobody cared.

SVB then publicly released its annual financial report to the market in January 2023; this report once again showed massive unrealized bond losses. And yet, in response, investors gobbled up SVB shares, and the stock price shot through the roof. No one cared about the insolvency.

It remained this way for months. Then, suddenly, the bank collapsed virtually overnight. It was so obvious in retrospect… and yet all the ‘experts’, including Wall Street analysts and government regulators, totally missed the warning signs.

This reminds me of the cartoons I watched when I was a kid, when Wile E. Coyote ran off a cliff, only realized when he was halfway across the canyon that he no longer had any ground underneath him.

SVB was insolvent in 2022. But like Wile E. Coyote, no one realized it until it was too late.

It’s the same thing with the Federal Reserve. They publish financial statements showing extreme unrealized losses… which grow worse with every interest rate hike. It’s so obvious.

I’ve been predicting for years that Fed would eventually engineer its own insolvency. Well now they’ve done it. Wile E. Coyote has already run off the cliff.

This doesn’t mean that Mr. Coyote will plummet to the canyon floor today, tomorrow, or even next year.

But it is very difficult to argue (though some “experts” will surely try) that the mark-to-market insolvency of the largest, most important central bank in the world is somehow a good thing.

An insolvent central bank does not make America stronger. It does not make the US economy stronger. It does not make the dollar stronger.

This is one obvious reason to consider diversifying out of the dollar, and into an asset that isn’t controlled by central banks.

And gold is one obvious candidate to consider.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/K1JZUFI
via IFTTT

Chevron and Public Rights

There is an interesting post on the future of Chevron over at JReg, from Professor Ilan Wurman at ASU. With Prof. Wurman’s permission, I thought I would post the whole thing here:

A Missing Distinction in Loper

Two weeks ago, the petitioners filed their brief in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the case next term in which the Supreme Court will reconsider Chevron deference. Several legal scholars have also filed amicus briefs in favor of petitioners or on behalf of neither party. I am not among them. But I was somewhat surprised that both the petitioners and these scholars left a critical legal distinction—that between private and public rights—largely unexamined or altogether unmentioned. Whether Chevron deference violates Article III or not seems to me, anyway, to depend largely on whether that case at hand involves private or public rights (aside from whether Congress has in fact authorized such deference).

Professor Mascott‘s brief and Professor Merrill‘s brief don’t mention the distinction in their discussions of Article III; nor does the petitioners’ brief mention the distinction at all. Professors Barnett and Walker argue that “constitutional arguments against Chevron are unpersuasive” because “Congress can preclude judicial review altogether of some or all claims under Article III.” They briefly gesture to the relevance of the distinction when they write that “[p]erhaps Chevron offends Article III in certain contexts, such as when private rights are at issue or agency interpretations lead to criminal liability.” Professor Bamzai gives the most attention to the public-private distinction in his brief. In cases in which “non-Article III adjudication” is permissible, deferential review might be permissible; those cases, as the Court said in Stern v. Marshall, typically involve what are called “public rights.” But, Bamzai writes, taking an “extreme example,” courts would surely not give deference to Department of Justice interpretations in criminal cases.

It seems to me that the question that Barnett and Walker, and Bamzai, address is the right one, but more elaboration would be useful. Can Congress in fact preclude judicial review altogether in “some” claims under Article III, or in “all” claims? This matters because, as Barnett and Walker recognize, the greater power to preclude review surely includes the lesser power to authorize deferential review. If this greater power only exists for some cases, it would seem to be very important to try to figure out what those cases are. So we should be asking: (1) What are public rights cases? (2) Why are public rights cases exempt from Article III?

This is not the place to go into all the details, but as I and several other scholars like Caleb NelsonAnn Woolhandler, and Will Baude have written, at a minimum “private rights” are rights that persons would have had in the state of nature, as modified by the civil law, such as the rights to life, liberty, and to acquire and possess property; “public rights” are rights belonging to the public or are entitlements private individuals can claim from the government. The classic examples of public rights are rights of way, such as public roads and waterways; and public privileges like welfare benefits, public employment, and public land grants. It is familiar to all that, as a historical matter, public rights did not have to be determined by a court at all.

There are at least two reasons such rights could be resolved without a court. First, the administration of public benefits and government resources easily fit within the definition of executive power, as opposed to judicial power, which is required to divest someone of private rights. Second, sovereign immunity would have barred suits in which a citizen was wrongfully denied a claim for such benefits. If such matters need not be determined by a court at all, then the legislature can authorize limited judicial review, including deferential judicial review. Divesting persons of their private rights to life, liberty, and property, on the other hand, is the core of the judicial power; it is the kind of thing that only courts vested with the “judicial power” can do, at least as a historical matter. And sovereign immunity would not apply.

If all of that is right, and the judicial power is “emphatically . . . to say what the law is” in cases involving the rights of the individual, then at least deference to legal interpretations would seem to be unconstitutional in such cases. And if Congress can preclude review of public rights cases, then it can authorize deferential review in those cases.

There remains the problem, however, of the Supreme Court having greatly expanded the definition of public rights. To simplify a bit, in the middle two quarters of the twentieth century—the leading cases are NLRB v. Jones & Laughlinand Atlas Roofing—the Supreme Court held that many rights or causes of action created by congressional statute are public rights. But as even Crowell v. Benson recognized, the source of law is irrelevant to whether a matter is one of public or private right; the relationship between the parties and the legal interest at stake are what matter. See 285 U.S. at 51 (“The present case . . . is one of private right, that is, of the liability of one individual to another under the law as defined”).

Thus, if the Supreme Court wants to address the constitutional question (which it may not want to do), it would eventually have to revisit its public rights jurisprudence. To be sure, it can avoid the issue entirely because even if Congress could have precluded review, the question remains whether it has required or authorized deferential review in those situations where review is available. And as Professor Bamzai writes in his brief, arguably APA section 706 answers those questions in the negative.

How would all of this cash out in Loper? Interestingly, the case involves the right to harvest fish in national fisheries. As I have written in a completely different context—the context of antebellum comity clause jurisprudence—access to natural resources such as fisheries was understood to be a public right! So I suspect that Congress could preclude review in these cases and could authorize deferential review. Whether it has done so in this case would seem to be the real question after all.

 

The post Chevron and Public Rights appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/dfMpJAm
via IFTTT

Justice Sotomayor Defends Racial and Ethnic Classifications Relied Upon by Harvard and UNC

Justice Sotomayor, in the Students for Fair Admissions affirmative action cases:

The Court also holds that Harvard’s and UNC’s race conscious programs are unconstitutional because they rely on racial categories that are “imprecise,” “opaque,” and “arbitrary.”

We’re off to a bad start. The issue is not simply that Harvard and UNC use these categories in a “race conscious” way, it’s that Harvard and UNC classified their students by these categories, and then gave them an admissions bonus if they checked the box showing they were members of certain classifications.

To start, the racial categories that the Court finds troubling resemble those used across the Federal Government for data collection, compliance reporting, and program administration purposes, including, for example, by the U. S. Census Bureau. See, e.g., 62 Fed. Reg. 58786–58790 (1997). Surely, not all “‘federal grant-in-aid benefits, drafting of legislation, urban and regional planning, business planning, and academic and social studies'” that flow from census data collection, Department of Commerce v. New York, 588 U. S. ___, ___ (2019) (slip op., at 2), are constitutionally suspect.

A lot of the things Sotomayor mentions are indeed problematic from a public policy point of view, because the classifications are so imprecise and arbitrary. Someone should write a book about it! But from a constitutional perspective, taking data based on these classifications into account for whatever reason is a different matter than classifying individuals and rewarding or penalizing them because they checked a particular box on a form.

The majority presumes that it knows better and appoints itself as an expert on data collection methods, calling for a higher level of granularity to fix a supposed problem of overinclusiveness and underinclusiveness.

As I discuss in some detail in my book, it was not “experts” who came up with these classifications, but, as Justice Gorsuch notes, “bureaucrats.” Experts at the Census Bureau were livid when the Bureau decided to adopt these classifications for the 1980 Census. They found the “Hispanic” classification to be especially nonsensical, and product of politics rather than sound data policy.

But if we do want to defer to the pseudo-experts in the government who came up with them, we should recall that when they were initially published in the Federal Register in 1978, they came with these caveats: The “classifications should not be interpreted as being scientific or anthropological in nature” and should not be “viewed as determinants of eligibility for participation in any Federal program,” assumedly alluding to affirmative action. As for various public and private planning uses of the data, the argument is circular; academics and planners use the data because the Census Bureau collects the data, which makes the relevant data cheap and readily available. If the Census Bureau used different classifications, researchers would generally use those instead.

Yet it does not identify a single instance where respondents’ methodology has prevented any student from reporting their race with the level of detail they preferred. The record shows that it is up to students to choose whether to identify as one, multiple, or none of these categories. See Harvard I, 397 F. Supp. 3d, at 137; UNC, 567 F. Supp. 3d, at 596. To the extent students need to convey additional information, students can select subcategories or provide more detail in their personal statements or essays. See Harvard I, 397 F. Supp. 3d, at 137. Students often do so. See, e.g., 2 App. in No. 20–1199, at 906–907 (student respondent discussing her Latina identity on her application); id., at 949 (student respondent testifying he “wrote about [his] Vietnamese identity on [his] application”). Notwithstanding this Court’s confusion about racial self-identification, neither students nor universities are confused. There is no evidence that the racial categories that respondents use are unworkable.

I can attest with some confidence that people are very confused about the relevant classifications, but for now I will just point out that some of the Justices themselves are confused, including Sotomayor. She consistently alludes to a Latino racial classification in this and other opinions, but no such classification exists. Rather, there is a Hispanic/Latino ethnic classification, delineated separately from race. This classification is based on ancestry and cultural ties to Spain, so unlike “Latino” it includes Spaniards but excludes Brazilians. At oral argument, Justice Alito referred to a student of Afghani descent wondering why he should be put in the same classification as a Chinese American. In fact, while this is far from clear from the Common App, the underlying classification scheme considers people from Afghanistan to be white. As for providing more detail in one’s personal statement or essay, the evidence showed that Harvard and UNC only classified their students by the main classifications; if a student had an interesting story related to, e.g., his Vietnamese background, that might make for a compelling essay, but Harvard and UNC would still “count” that student only as an “Asian American” for statistical purposes.

[In a footnote, Sotomayor adds:] The Court suggests that the term “Asian American” was developed by respondents because they are “uninterested” in whether Asian American students “are adequately represented.” Ante, at 25; see also ante, at 5 (GORSUCH, J., concurring) (suggesting that “[b]ureaucrats” devised a system that grouped all Asian Americans into a single racial category).

That’s just a weird distortion of what Roberts wrote for the majority: “Some of them are plainly overbroad: by grouping together all Asian students, for instance, respondents are apparently uninterested in whether South Asian or East Asian students are adequately represented, so long as there is enough of one to compensate for a lack of the other.”

That argument offends the history of that term. “The term ‘Asian American’ was coined in the late 1960s by Asian American activists—mostly college students—to unify Asian ethnic groups that shared common experiences of race-based violence and discrimination and to advocate for civil rights and visibility.” Brief for Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund et al. as Amici Curiae 9 (AALDEF Brief ).

Well, to be more precise the term “Asian American” was coined by Japanese and Chinese American students, who wanted a common term for the reasons Sotomayor suggests. Whether Filipinos, then the largest Asian American group, qualified was an open question, and those activists would have been surprised, maybe shocked, to learn that South Asians were later folded into the classification. Beyond that, Gorsuch never claimed that bureaucrats invented the term “Asian American.” Rather, he wrote, “Where do these boxes come from? Bureaucrats. A federal
interagency commission devised this scheme of classifications in the 1970s to facilitate data collection.” That is accurate. And it bears noting that the majority of so-called “Asian Americans” don’t accept that moniker, even as a secondary identity.

The post Justice Sotomayor Defends Racial and Ethnic Classifications Relied Upon by Harvard and UNC appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/WRPw8gp
via IFTTT

How Much More Will Homebuilders Have To Reduce Prices To Increase Sales?

How Much More Will Homebuilders Have To Reduce Prices To Increase Sales?

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MIshTalk.com,

Median new home prices are plunging. What will homebuilders do for an encore to entice buyers?

Median new home sales prices vs new home sales, data from the Census Department, chart by Mish

Existing homes sales prices remain stubbornly high as measured by Case-Shiller repeat sales of the same home.

In contrast, homebuilders have passed on lumber price discounts, offer interest rate buydowns, and now build smaller homes.

Median New Home Sales Price vs Recessions

Peak-to-Trough Declines

  • Great Recession: $262,600 to $204,200: 22.2 Percent Decline

  • Current: $496,800 to $415,400: 16.4 Percent Decline

New Home Sales vs Median Sales Price Detail

Buyers hit a brick wall on price with a peak of $496,800 in October of 2022. Median price has fallen 16.4 percent since then.

Price declines of 10 percent or more are usually associated with recessions. We now have a recovery of sorts from -10.39 percent to -4.0 percent, but that’s primarily due to easier comparisons, not rising prices.

Mortgage News Daily Rates

Buyers hit the brick wall in price when mortgage rates approached 7.0 percent. Transactions started declining much quicker.

The transaction stall point is more apparent in existing home sales.

Existing Home Sales Percent Change

Existing-home sales data from the NAR via St. Louis Fed download.

Existing Home Sales Seasonally Adjusted

Existing home sales went into a massive set of declines starting in February of 2022. Mortgage rates had barely started ticking up.

For discussion, please see Existing Home Sales Resume Slide, Down 15 of the Last 17 Months

The Housing Bubble, as Measured by Case-Shiller, Is Expanding Again

Home prices rose in May, from April, in every city in the 10-city list.

Killer Combination

The killer combination for existing home sales transactions was a sharp increase in mortgage rates coupled with a sharp increase in asking price.

As long as we have high mortgage rates and high asking prices, sales will remain in the gutter.

People do not want to trade a 3.0 percent mortgage for a 7.0 percent mortgage.

For discussion, please see The Housing Bubble, as Measured by Case-Shiller, Is Expanding Again

What Will it Take?

This brings us back to the lead question: How Much More Will Homebuilders Have to Reduce Prices to Increase Sales?

To boost sales, builders have passed along drops in lumber prices, reduced home sizes, reduced lot sizes, and bought down mortgage rates. But the easy fruit is off the vine.

For existing home sales, current transactions reflect a combination of mortgage rates, price, and willingness of consumers to speculate on rising home prices.

For new home sales, factor in ability and willingness of homebuilders to make homes more affordable with incentives or by building smaller homes. More incentives reduces profit.

Noose Tightens on Consumer Credit, Auto Loan Rejections Hit Record High

Please note, the Noose Tightens on Consumer Credit, Auto Loan Rejections Hit Record High

Yet, the consensus opinion has changed from recession to soft landing. Does anyone hear a bell?

*  *  *

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 07/31/2023 – 07:20

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/KsMV2qf Tyler Durden

Trucking Giant Yellow Ceases Operations

Trucking Giant Yellow Ceases Operations

By Todd Maiden of FreightWaves

Yellow’s bankruptcy filing could be announced Monday

Less-than-truckload carrier Yellow Corp. ceased all operations at 12 p.m. Sunday, according to a notice on the gates at its terminals.

Separate internal documents showed the procedures for closing the facilities as well as “talking points” to be used when informing union employees not to show up for their shifts. The documents indicated the company plans to issue a public statement Monday updating “the state of the company and the operation.”

On Friday, Yellow laid off most of its nonunion employees in areas like customer service, information technology and sales. The company stopped making pickups earlier in the week and has been delivering the remaining freight in its network ahead of what appears to be a permanent closure.  

After months of negotiations with its Teamsters workforce, the carrier has been unable to reach terms over proposed operational changes it has said were required for its survival. In a breach of contract lawsuit filed last month regarding the matter, the company said it could be out of cash as soon as mid-July.

Most are expecting Yellow to announce it will file for bankruptcy Monday.

Tyler Durden
Mon, 07/31/2023 – 07:08

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/aWMYB80 Tyler Durden

Ford Will Lose $4.5 Billion On EVs This Year, Up From $2.1 Billion Last Year

Ford Will Lose $4.5 Billion On EVs This Year, Up From $2.1 Billion Last Year

As we first noted last week, Ford is slated to lose $4.5 billion from its EV segment this year, a $1.5 billion larger loss than the company had expected. 

So far this year, the division has lost $1.8 billion and this year’s $4.5 billion loss figure blows away last year’s $2.1 billion loss. Ford also announced that its electric F-150 pickup trucks will undergo a price cut, according to Fox.

Ford beat earnings on Thursday and reported adjusted EPS of $0.72, beating expectations of $0.54. It posted revenue of $45 billion and adjusted EBITDA of $3.8 billion, above estimates of $3.15 billion. We detailed analyst takes on the report late last week in this piece

The company also raised its guidance, forecasting adjusted EBIT of $11 billion to $12 billion from $9 billion to $11 billion. The company is now guiding for free cash flow of $6.5 billion to $7 billion, from $6 billion. 

But reality has sunk in about the company’s comments regarding its EV production schedule and spending plans. Price cuts in the industry, led by Elon Musk and Tesla, have thrown Ford’s production targets into a tailspin and Morgan Stanley noted on Friday morning that “major changes to the EV strategy” could be necessary, according to a wrap up by Bloomberg. 

Ford now says it is “throttling back” on plans to ramp up EV production, the wrap up said. It blamed the price war for EVs as part of the cause and told shareholders it would need another year to meet its target of 600,000 EVs produced annually. 

Ford CEO Jim Farley said late last week: “The shift to powerful digital experiences and breakthrough EVs is underway and going to be volatile, so being able to guide customers through and adapt to the pace of adoption are big advantages for us. Ford+ is making us more resilient, efficient and profitable, which you can see in Ford Pro’s breakout second-quarter revenue improvement (22%) and EBIT margin (15%).”

CFO John Lawler said yesterday that the company “has ample resources to simultaneously fund disciplined investment in growth and return capital to shareholders – for the latter, targeting 40% to 50% of adjusted free cash flow,” Bloomberg added. He now says Ford is “not providing a date” for producing 2 million EVs per year, which was previously the company’s target for 2026. 

Ford’s inability to compete with Tesla was noted earlier this year in a piece titled Tesla ‘Weaponizes’ Price-Cuts To Crush EV Competition

Is the company pulling an Intel and “kitchen sinking” its guide for the year, or has Elon Musk’s price cuts over at Tesla really put the legacy automaker on the ropes? Ford reports again on October 26, where we’ll get our next glimpse into its continuing operations this year. 

Tyler Durden
Mon, 07/31/2023 – 06:55

via ZeroHedge News https://ift.tt/QzD3dUb Tyler Durden

Americans Love NASA, But Private Firms Do the Real Work in Space


A young boy watches a SpaceX rocket launch on the Internet.

Despite the successes of private space companies, many Americans cling to a notion of NASA as representing the country beyond the atmosphere. In fact, though, NASA relies on capabilities developed and owned by others. The Space Launch System [SLS] is supposed to restore the agency’s role, but it’s antiquated and clunky when compared to private competitors. Public opinion has yet to catch up with an innovation boom that has moved beyond misty memories of NASA in its moon-landing heyday.

Fond Memories of a Space Pioneer

“Most Americans continue to believe that the U.S. space agency NASA has a critical role to play, even as private space companies like SpaceX, Blue Origin and Virgin Galactic are increasingly involved in space,” Pew Research reported earlier this month. “Overall, 65% of U.S. adults say it is essential that NASA continue to be involved in space exploration, the survey finds. A smaller share (32%) believe that private companies will ensure enough progress is made in space exploration, even without NASA’s involvement.”

The Biden administration is happy to play to such sentiments with its National Cislunar Science & Technology Strategy which heavily emphasizes “the NASA Artemis program, with its near-term mission to return humans to the Moon.” But the publication of that strategy last November was no accident, coinciding as it did with the successful test of the long-delayed Space Launch System and Orion crew capsule. Without the SLS, plans for NASA’s return to the moon are pipe dreams, since it has largely relied on others for reaching space since the 2011 retirement of the space shuttle program.

“Without SpaceX, the only U.S. company currently capable of carrying cargo to the ISS would currently be Northrop Grumman, and NASA would still be reliant on the Russian Soyuz for crew transportation,” The Planetary Society noted in 2020.

But the SLS is less of a great leap forward than an impressive exercise in digging through the spare parts bin and seeing what you can cobble together.

Repackaged Space Shuttle Technology

“To reduce cost and development time, NASA is upgrading proven hardware from the space shuttle and other exploration programs while making use of cutting-edge tooling and manufacturing technology,” NASA cheerfully boasts. What that means, according to Space.com, is that “components that previously flew on 83 out of the 135 space shuttle missions have been assembled into new vehicles: the Space Launch System [SLS] and its Orion spacecraft.”

Despite a lot of off-the-shelf parts, the SLS arrived years late and billions of dollars over-budget. It didn’t even have a defined mission until the return to the moon was first announced during the Trump administration.

“Ultimately, jobs—and not actual progress in space—seem to be the driving force of the program,” space analyst and consultant Rand Simberg (who has written for Reason) charged in 2011. “Even if it never actually flies, SLS may still meet its primary mission requirement: delivering federal funding to the states and districts of those in Congress with a particular interest in NASA’s budget.”

Former NASA Deputy Administrator Lori Garver is also no fan of the SLS.

“It’s all about flight rate,” she told Ars Technica last year. “It will become inevitably embarrassing if [SpaceX’s] Starship is launching dozens of times a year like Falcon 9 is, and SLS once every two years.” She doesn’t have high hopes that NASA’s new baby is up to the challenge because “they took finicky, expensive programs that couldn’t fly very often, stacked them together differently, and said now, all of a sudden, it’s going to be cheap and easy. The shuttle was supposed to fly 40 or 50 times a year. And at its max it never got close. Typically, it was four or five.”

That’s not to say that Garver is pessimistic about space exploration. On the contrary, she’s excited about recent developments and what the future holds.

“I’m really positive about the future of space. The last decade has exceeded my expectations largely because of SpaceX. I just want to be clear about that. I couldn’t have imagined, as I said in the book [Escaping Gravity, published in 2022], that we would have something like a Starship as far along in the testing as it is today.”

Unlike the expendable SLS, which has a super-heavy-lift capacity of more than 200,000 pounds to low-earth orbit, the reusable Starship, with comparable (or greater) payload has yet to enjoy a successful test. The same could be said of Blue Origin’s reusable New Glenn. But Space X’s Falcon Heavy has had multiple missions and is based on the smaller, crew-rated Falcon 9 with over 200 missions to orbit. Northrop Grumman’s Antares series has also had multiple successful launches.

Old Tech and High Prices

Payload isn’t everything; the price of getting into space is also important, and private alternatives are much more cost-effective than what NASA is expected to deliver with its new-ish space capabilities.

“At an estimated cost of over $2 billion per launch for the SLS once development is complete, the use of a commercial launch vehicle would provide over $1.5 billion in cost savings,” the Office of Management and Budget observed about requirements that the SLS be used for the upcoming Europa mission.

“Congress will force the agency to pay $2 billion per launch on the SLS while New Space companies like SpaceX and Blue Origin — companies that NASA helped foster — offer the same capabilities for a tenth of the cost or less,” Eli Dourado of the Center for Growth and Opportunity at Utah State University warned. “It’s an enormous waste of taxpayer funds.”

Private Firms Take the Lead

But if NASA isn’t competitive with private firms, entrepreneurs aren’t waiting for permission to go out on their own. Not only is cargo reaching orbit on privately developed and operated launch systems, but Blue Origin, SpaceX, and Virgin Galactic have also embarked on space tourism.

“This is the new look of human space exploration as government’s long-held monopoly on space travel continues to erode, redefining not only who owns the vehicles that carry people to space, but also the very nature of what an astronaut is and who gets to be one,” The Washington Post observed in 2021.

So, American opinion hasn’t yet caught up with the reality in space. But if you dig deeper, people’s ideas for NASA’s priorities strongly emphasize the government’s traditional role in national defense.

“When asked what NASA’s priorities should be, Americans rank monitoring asteroids that could hit the Earth and monitoring the Earth’s climate system at the top of the list,” reports Pew. Sending astronauts back to the moon was named a top priority by just 12 percent.

“The only area where Americans specifically want the federal government to remain in control is when it comes to the launching of military satellites,” found a similar YouGov poll in 2021.

Americans obviously have fond memories about a past when NASA sent astronauts to the moon. But their vision for the agency’s future is focused on a protective role in space while private enterprise innovates and handles the (literal) heavy lifting.

The post Americans Love NASA, But Private Firms Do the Real Work in Space appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/YmMuJEI
via IFTTT

An Infuriating New Online Game Asks: Would You Be Able To Immigrate to the U.S.?


Red tape over the United States on a globe

Many critics of illegal immigration argue that foreigners should get in line if they want to move to the United States. It shouldn’t be so hard or time-consuming, they argue, for a law-abiding foreigner simply to wait his turn to get a green card.

The reality of the U.S. immigration system is much more complicated and costly than that. To that effect, the Cato Institute, a free market think tank, has released The Green Card Game. Players must navigate the game’s twists and turns in the hopes of securing a green card, which will allow them to live and work in the U.S. legally and eventually become a citizen.

Players start the game with no close family in the U.S. and no prior travel there. They can play with randomly generated backgrounds or fill in their own characteristics to see how they’d fare against the system. Each misstep pushes a player’s arrival date later and immigration costs higher. At any point, players can ask for advice from an attorney (for a fee) or a bureaucrat (for a headache).

“The legal immigration system is extremely complicated,” says David J. Bier, associate director of immigration studies at the Cato Institute. (Bier and Alex Nowrasteh, vice president of economic and social policy studies at Cato, were responsible for game design.) “The game illustrates that even if you figure the rules out, getting a positive result still depends a great deal on luck and other factors outside your control.”

The game starts off simple, asking a player whether he is fully vaccinated, has a criminal record, is a Communist, or “participate[d] in Nazi Germany persecution from 1933 to 1945.” After answering those asks correctly, a player has to try to qualify for a green card under one of four categories: the refugee system, the Diversity Visa lottery, employer sponsorship, and self-sponsorship.

“The first choice a player will make in the game (your country of birth) could end up mattering more than a $100,000 job offer,” explains Bier, noting that players will repeatedly have to grapple with the “Bureaucratic Wheel of Fortune.” Many scenarios come down to pure chance: “Will a government adjudicator believe you? Will you win a lottery? Will a U.S. worker apply for the job before you get a green card? Will your paperwork get lost?”

I started the game with a randomized background: a 65-year-old Bhutanese therapist with a bachelor’s degree and $11,130 in savings, married with six minor children, Buddhist, and hoping to reach Montana. I figured the Diversity Visa would be a good option, since it caters to “individuals who are from countries with low rates of immigration to the United States.” But I quickly found out that there’s no consulate or embassy in Bhutan processing immigrant visas. My chances further fell apart when I said I didn’t have a job offer in the U.S. and the government didn’t think I could financially support my family on my savings.

With all options exhausted, I was out $2,150 for required travel, translation, and medical costs. Round after round, different background after different background, I was unable to get into the country legally. I never even came close to the citizenship test. At one point, as a highly educated Afghan doctor fleeing religious persecution, I had no choice but to spend thousands on a journey from South America to the U.S.-Mexico border. My arrival date ticked up to 2045—only for a judge to reject my asylum case. (Unfortunately, that exact journey is a reality for many.)

The game relies heavily on Bier’s June policy analysis, “Why Legal Immigration Is Nearly Impossible.” The report noted that “fewer than 1 percent of people who want to move permanently to the United States can do so legally,” thanks to factors such as low annual visa caps, a lack of U.S.-based sponsors, and application costs. “Legal immigration is less like waiting in line and more like winning the lottery,” wrote Bier. “It happens, but it is so rare that it is irrational to expect it in any individual case.”

“A lot of people might play and conclude that the game is biased,” says Bier. “But the reality is that the game is easier than real life. In real life, you can’t set your profile, pick your country of birth, and play as many times as it takes.”

The post An Infuriating New Online Game Asks: Would You Be Able To Immigrate to the U.S.? appeared first on Reason.com.

from Latest https://ift.tt/pEijWI2
via IFTTT