Tag: finance

Following the ridiculously round number demands of EUR100 billion ransom to leave the EU, UK PM Theresa May has stated that EU officials have issued threats against The UK as Europe's negotiating stance has toughened. Furthermore, May accuses EU countries of trying to maliciously influence UK general election result.

• *MAY SAYS U.K. WANTS DEAL, BUT NO DEAL BETTER THAN BAD ONE
• *MAY SAYS SOME IN BRUSSELS DO NOT WANT TALKS TO SUCCEED
• *MAY SAYS SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES IF WE DON'T GET BREXIT RIGHT
• *MAY SAYS LEAKS DELIBERATELY TIMED TO AFFECT ELECTION RESULT

“There are some in Brussels who do not want these talks to succeed, who do not want Britain to prosper.”

 

“In the last few days we’ve seen just how difficult these talks are going to be”

 

“Britain’s negotiating position in Europe has been misrepresented in the European press”

And cable is fading…

 

Here is Dan Hannan explaining the idiocy spewing forth from the EU…

via http://ift.tt/2oXPJde Tyler Durden

Following API's surprisingly large drawdowns, DOE almost completely refuted it with an inventory build for gasoline and a very small draw for crude. WTI and RBOB prices dropped on the headlines, not helped by yet another increase in US crude production to cycle highs.

 

API

• Crude -4.158mm (-3.5mm exp) – biggest since 2016
• Cushing -215k
• Gasoline -1.93mm (+1mm exp)
• Distillates -436k

DOE

• Crude -930k (-3mm exp)
• Cushing -728k (-900k exp)
• Gasoline +191k (+1mm exp)
• Distillates -562k (+2mm exp)

3rd weekly build for gasoline and notably small draw for crude…

 

US Crude production rosae once again to August 2015 highs…

 

Both WTI and RBOB had faded some of the bounce after last night's API data before DOE data hit, but the surprise build in gasoline (and small draw in crude) sent prices tumblimg…

 

 

via http://ift.tt/2pFbCe5 Tyler Durden

Our article regarding Sub-Prime 2.0 garnered a lot of attention.

After all, we’re talking about a $1.2 trillion credit bubble in auto-loans, with roughly 1 in 3 new loans going to sub-prime borrowers.

Today we’re building on that theme with some chart analysis.

One of the best means of wrapping your ahead around an industry is to examine the charts of its 3 biggest players.

Those charts represent the collective understanding of millions of investors looking at the same industry. As such it can paint a very clear picture, quickly, of what the investment world thinks of an industry and its prospects.

With that in mind, today we’re looking at the charts of the Big Three US Automakers.

General Motors (GM).

GM emerged from bankruptcy and went public again in 2010. And while things are not as bad as they were in 2011-2012, the company has basically been treading water since 2013. Even the Trump hype has faded here and we’re back in the doldrums.

Put simply, this chart says “no growth, and internal struggles continue.”

Fiat Chrysler (FCAU):

Here again the company disappeared for a while (this time when Fiat bought Chrysler, NOT through bankruptcy like General Motors). However, once again, we see a company that is gyrating in a large range, NOT growing or breaking to new highs. Again momentum is rolling over and we’re facing a LARGE drop.

Again, “zero growth, and big issues afoot.”

Ford:

This is the only one of the three that has been in continuous trading since before the 2008 Crisis. And again this chart is telling us there has been no real growth since 2010.

Moreover, the company is now turning for the worse. Momentum has broken down to the point that the trendline from the 2009 low has been broken. We’re now just sitting on the ledge of a cliff waiting to drop.

Taken as a whole, these three charts are telling us that the US auto-industry is experiencing next to no growth. And this is happening at a time when nearly 1/3^rd of all new auto-loans are SUB-PRIME.

Zero growth and garbage loans? This is SUB-PRIME 2.0.

Fortunately there are ways to profit from this.

To pick up a FREE investment report outlining three investments that you could make you a ton of money when the markets collapse… 

CLICK HERE!

Best Regards

Graham Summers

Chief Market Strategist

Phoenix Capital Research

 

 

via http://ift.tt/2p5FNJv Phoenix Capital Research

Facebook’s latest response to the public outcry that resulted from the recent livestreaming of a murder on the social network, was announced moments ago when on his personal blog, Mark Zuckerberg announced that over the next year, Facebook “will be adding 3,000 people — on top of the 4,500 we have today — to review the millions of reports we get every week, and improve the process for doing it quickly.” In addition to violence, the crackdown also tragets “hate speech and child exploitation.”

Zuckerberg also notes that “we’ll keep working with local community groups and law enforcement who are in the best position to help someone if they need it — either because they’re about to harm themselves, or because they’re in danger from someone else.”

To all those who are about to spend the next few years watching videos of crime and suicide all day, every day, our condolences. As for whether Facebook will be able to eradicate violence, hate speech, and aggression, we doubt we are the only ones who are skeptical, and furthermore, we wonder when advertisers will express a similar sentiment.

Zuckerberg’s full blog post:

Over the last few weeks, we’ve seen people hurting themselves and others on Facebook — either live or in video posted later. It’s heartbreaking, and I’ve been reflecting on how we can do better for our community.

 

If we’re going to build a safe community, we need to respond quickly. We’re working to make these videos easier to report so we can take the right action sooner — whether that’s responding quickly when someone needs help or taking a post down.

 

Over the next year, we’ll be adding 3,000 people to our community operations team around the world — on top of the 4,500 we have today — to review the millions of reports we get every week, and improve the process for doing it quickly.

 

These reviewers will also help us get better at removing things we don’t allow on Facebook like hate speech and child exploitation. And we’ll keep working with local community groups and law enforcement who are in the best position to help someone if they need it — either because they’re about to harm themselves, or because they’re in danger from someone else.

 

In addition to investing in more people, we’re also building better tools to keep our community safe. We’re going to make it simpler to report problems to us, faster for our reviewers to determine which posts violate our standards and easier for them to contact law enforcement if someone needs help. As these become available they should help make our community safer.

 

This is important. Just last week, we got a report that someone on Live was considering suicide. We immediately reached out to law enforcement, and they were able to prevent him from hurting himself. In other cases, we weren’t so fortunate.

 

No one should be in this situation in the first place, but if they are, then we should build a safe community that gets them the help they need.

via http://ift.tt/2pHJ062 Tyler Durden

Despite the hope-narrative-crushing drop in Manufacturing data (ISM/PMI), Services data in April (PMI/ISM) showed improvements. Markit PMI rose modestly despite continued input price inflation (21-month highs) and a plunge in employment (to its lowest growth since July 2010). ISM Services also showed employment slip but new orders exploded higher.

ISM Services printed 57.5 – above all 73 economists’ estimates…

 

With manufacturing plunging, Services apparently rebounded…

Full ISM Breakdown:

• Business activity rose to 62.4 vs 58.9 prior month
• New orders rose to 63.2 vs 58.9
• Employment fell to 51.4 vs 51.6
• Supplier deliveries rose to 53.0 vs 51.5
• Inventory change rose to 52.5 vs 48.5
• Prices paid rose to 57.6 vs 53.5
• Backlog of orders rose to 53.5 vs 53
• New export orders rose to 65.5 vs 62.5
• Imports fell to 53.0 vs 56.5
• Inventory sentiment fell to 60.0 vs 65.0

As miraculously, unadjusted new orders reached a record high…

Commenting on the PMI data, Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at IHS Markit said:

“The final services PMI came in above the earlier flash estimate but remained only marginally higher than March’s six-month low.

 

“Combined with a weak manufacturing PMI reading, the surveys suggest that business activity is growing at a slower pace than seen over the first quarter as a whole.

 

“However, a robust rise is likely to be seen in second quarter GDP as the official numbers exhibit greater seasonality than the PMI, with consistently weak first quarters being typically followed by a rebound in subsequent periods. For this very reason, GDP data seemed to signal weaker growth than implied by the PMI in the first quarter of 2017.

via http://ift.tt/2p5oBE4 Tyler Durden

FBI Director James Comey will be thrust back into the public spotlight over the next couple of days as he is scheduled to provide testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee today followed by a closed-door session with the House Intelligence Committee tomorrow. 

Just last week we got a sneak peak of some of the fireworks that are expected at today’s hearing when Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley sent a letter to Comey pressing him on “inconsistencies” in his testimony on the infamous dossier containing incendiary, but unverified, allegations about Trump’s connection to the Kremlin.  Here are some excerpts from Grassley’s press release:

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley today pressed the FBI director ahead of next week’s oversight hearing for details of the FBI’s involvement with Christopher Steele, the British ex-spy who authored the unsubstantiated anti-Trump dossier on behalf of opposition research firm Fusion GPS.  In the limited details provided to the committee on the matter, the FBI’s description of its relationship with Steele appears to be materially inconsistent with Justice Department documents later revealed to the committee.

 

Grassley and Ranking Member Dianne Feinstein first raised questions in mid-February about the resignation of National Security Advisory Michael Flynn and the leaks of classified information involving him.  Grassley then sought details from the FBI on reports that it offered to pay Steele in connection with the unsubstantiated dossier.  As a result of the FBI’s failure to respond to the Flynn letter, Grassley publicly pledged to suspend action on the nomination for the Deputy Attorney General position pending a response to his questions. FBI Director James Comey briefed Grassley and Feinstein the following day.  While the briefing substantially addressed questions in the Flynn inquiry, it covered only a few the questions in the Steele inquiry.  The FBI attempted to claim after the briefing that it had adequately responded to the Steele questions, yet many remain unanswered.  Importantly, portions of Comey’s description of the FBI’s relationship with Steele appear to be in conflict with Justice Department documents reviewed by the committee following the briefing.

 

“Whether those inconsistencies were honest mistakes or an attempt to downplay the actual extent of the FBI’s relationship with Mr. Steele, it is essential that the FBI fully answer all of the questions from the March 6 letter and provide all the requested documents in order to resolve these and related issues,” Grassley said today in a letter to Comey.

The committee is also expected to question the role of FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe in the Hillary email investigation.  Republicans have repeatedly argued that McCabe should have recused himself from the Clinton investigation following reports a Clinton ally donated to his wife’s political campaign. The donations are also under investigation by the Justice Department’s inspector general.

Of course, all of this comes just one day after Hillary Clinton laid all of the blame for her 2016 election loss squarely at the feet of James Comey and ‘Russian’ WikiLeaks, saying “I was on the way to winning before Jim Comey’s letter and ‘Russian’ Wikileaks… scared off late voters” (full post here).

Should be a fun hearing with plenty of theatrics and grandstanding.

via http://ift.tt/2pY01ds Tyler Durden

Richard Breslow, the former FX trader and fund manager who writes for Bloomberg and frequently graces these pages, in his latest “trader’s note” summarizes the sheer confusion that has gripped a directionless market, in which central banks have killed price discovery and where volatility appears to be an artefact of a long one past. Hardly anything new here, but a good summary of where the “market” finds itself on the day when the first 4x levereaged ETF was released.

His full note below:

Sometimes Prices, Like a Cigar, Are Just Prices

Investors are suffering from the increasing amount of insider trading going on. Not the kind generated from golf course confidences or sifting through corporate dust bins, but from markets that just aren’t capable of trending. Because fewer and fewer market participants are comfortable answering the question, “What’s going on?”

A lot of this is from the much-discussed volatility suppression caused by central banks. They got what they wanted and now the negative externalities they failed to appreciate are dangerously affecting accurate price discovery. When we need it most. In their biographies they claim exigent circumstances. History will say they got too enamored with the sway they held over markets and were having too much fun.

But none of this is new. We’ve entered a new phase where the questions traders must deal with are not as simple as how much more quantitative easing is there to be wrung out of the system. And traders simply don’t know what they want to do. The result being we get long periods of inside days following gap moves. And this is largely untradable, unless you dig noise. The big questions remain unanswered.

The U.S. is tightening but the numbers stink. Look through them or worry. Most people think the Fed will try to have their cake and eat it too at today’s meeting by saying yes to both. But what does it mean going forward? Student loans and car sales versus the next status symbol iPhone.

And let’s face it, no one has any idea what’s going on in Washington. Is it really comforting that ineptitude is giving markets solace?

Europe has really turned the corner and the ECB may be forced to change tack? True in the aggregate, as long as you continue to define Europe as Germany. Want to get aggressive buying the euro when everyone acknowledges that the weak currency has been key to much of the economic recovery? Even a 20-point lead in French polls can’t seem to seal the deal for investors.

And I defy anyone to adequately and convincingly explain Chinese economic policies, let alone what zig or zag they’re likely to take in the next month. Have fun trading the Bloomberg commodities index based on the Sino narrative.

More dangerously, if less frustratingly, it sends false signals. The market creates a narrative around price levels that fails to take into account that many assets are where they are because it happens to be the place chance put them when they last stalled out.

Instead of asking yourself what does this price level mean, ponder the fact that it’s increasingly deja vu all over again. There has been plenty of news, but lets face it the S&P 500, like so many other assets, hasn’t done anything of significance in two months.

Emerging market currencies are doing great, but they, too, are right back where they were in mid-March. You would have had to be awfully good to anticipate the South Africa induced panic sell-off or the just as quick dip buying that brought us right back to where we started.

There’s a real crisis of confidence in where we’re going and who’s in charge. Until investors get a lot more comfortable in their outlook assume that prices, like your cigar, may just be what they are without a great underlying significance.

via http://ift.tt/2oXDsWc Tyler Durden

Authored by Charles Hugh-Smith via OfTwoMinds blog,

You may have seen these charts before, but they tell the story of a middle class in decline.

For any system to endure, it must maintain a built-in capacity to self-correct: that is, it must generate accurate informational feedback about dangerous asymmetries and auto-correct with behavioral feedback.

This is true of ecosystems and enterprises as well as political/social systems.

Human systems can lose the ability to self-correct in three basic ways.

1. The information feedback is no longer accurate because self-serving interests manipulate the data to maintain whatever narrative/data-flow supports their power, wealth and income.

2. Self-serving interests limit any behavioral feedback that threatens their power, wealth and income.

3. Those in positions of responsibility who are tasked with managing behavioral feedback are no longer accountable, so the needed behavioral feedback fails.

Self-serving interests committed to protecting their power, wealth and income have destroyed our economic-political system's ability to self-correct. There are many examples of these three dynamics; here are a few.

A law enforcement/judiciary system that has plenty of resources to pursue a costly, destructive, failed War on Drugs, but no resources to pursue white-collar financial crime. Have a low-level drug dealer in your sights? Hey, the DEA et al. have essentially unlimited resources to nail the perp: SWAT teams, surveillance, helicopters, you name it.

But when a bank embezzles/defrauds to the tune of $100 million, law enforcement and the judiciary throw up their hands: it's too complicated and costs too much. Really? So there's billions of dollars available to bust small-time drug dealers, but only pennies to pursue financial criminals stealing billions?

Financial rackets, fraud and embezzlement are now rewarded rather than punished. If a bank scams $100 million by rigging a market (for example), if the Feds even catch on the fine is a measely $10 million.

In effect, finance-based criminals are being told: go ahead and run your rackets–we'll impose a 10% fee on your skim.

Corporate-white-collar criminality is pervasive. Please read No Wrongdoing Here, Just 6,300 Corporate Fines and Settlements (May 2015):

I am honored to share a remarkable data base of Corporate Fines and Settlements from the early 1990s to the present compiled by Jon Morse. Here is Jon's description of his project to assemble a comprehensive list of all corporate fines and settlements that can be verified by media reports:

"This spreadsheet is all the corporate fines/settlements I’ve been able to find sourced articles about, mostly in the period from the 1990’s up to today (with a few 80’s and 70’s). This is by far the most comprehensive list of such things online. At least that I could find, because the lack of any decent list is what made me start compiling this list in the first place."

What struck me was the sheer number of corporate violations of laws and regulations–thousands upon thousands, the vast majority of which occurred since corporate profits began their incredible ascent in the early 2000s–and the list of those paying hundreds of millions of dollars in fines and settlements, which reads like a who's who of Corporate America and Top 100 Global Corporations.

I encourage you to open one of the three alphabetical tabs at the bottom of the spreadsheet on Google Docs and scroll down to find your favorite super-profitable corporation.

Many have a long list of fines and settlements, and many of the fines are in excess of $100 million. Many are for blatant cartel price-fixing, not disclosing the dangers of the company's heavily promoted medications, destroying documents to thwart an investigation of wrong-doing, etc.

In other words, these were not wrist-slaps for minor oversights of complex regulations— these are blatant violations of core laws of the land.

Correspondent Ron G. summarized a core reason why the status quo can no longer self-correct politically: the middle class has been so diminished, it has lost its essential function as a political counter-balance to the financial-political elites:

"The American economy and people are not being served by a government that was designed to be a Democratic Republic, whose architecture and balance of power depended on a property-owning middle class to be the countervailing force against Oligarchy; given the irreversible nature of the market and technology that contributed to the decline of the US middle class, (globalization, automation and AI), it is apparent that we will stay on this downward track of the middle class for the immediate future, and therefore more disparity, dispossession, and coercion will be needed to maintain control, and to me this means a future of intimidation, censorship and continued involuntary servitude."

You may have seen these charts before, but they tell the story of a middle class in decline: declining income, declining wealth and declining political influence as the elites (the few) rig elections (bye-bye Bernie), control the dominant narratives (official "fake news" isn't fake news, it's from the Ministry of Truth!) and siphon off the nation's wealth at the expense of the many.

Bread (SSI, welfare, Universal Basic Income, etc.), circuses (the corporate media, social media, etc.) and social "progressive" crumbs (gender-neutral bathrooms, etc.) are highly effective means to distract us from the core dynamic of our status quo: the transformation of our middle-class society to a neofeudal society of New Nobility, debt-serfs and a bread-and-circus-consuming lumpen-proletariat class.

Though this chart is from 2010, the recent data is even more lopsided in favor of the top tranche of wealth: data updated to 2013 (latest available):

Rather than address this rising inequality directly, the self-serving Elites have promoted propaganda and policies that protect their gains while obfuscating the reality that most American households have been losing ground for decades, a decline that has been masked by replacing real income with rising debt.

The rapid concentration of wealth has also concentrated political power in the hands of a few who seamlessly combine public and private modes of power.

This wealth and power protects the self-serving Elites from the perverse consequences of their dominance. Their precious offspring rarely serve at the point of the American military's spear, they never lose their jobs or income when corporations shift production (and R&D, etc.) overseas, and they are never replaced with illegal immigrants paid under the table.

The self-serving elites' accountability? Zero.

Systems that lose their ability to self-correct collapse. The self-serving elites and fiefdoms that have crippled the system's feedback mechanisms to protect their power, wealth and income think they're "winning" by imposing a new neofeudal order. But all they're really doing is ensuring the demise of the entire system.

via http://ift.tt/2p8DIgI Tyler Durden

With Bloomberg recently writing articles such as “Mnuchin to Wall Street: U.S. Is Serious About Ultra-Long Bonds“, “Mnuchin Says Ultra-Long U.S. Bonds Can Absolutely Make Sense” and “Wall Street Sees Treasury Paying Up for Ultra-Long Bond Issuance“, there was a tangible buildup of confusion and excitement that the US Treasury under Steven Mnuchin may follow in Europe’s footsteps and announced 50, if not 100 year Treasurys in the near future. As such, today’s quarterly refunding announcement by the Treasury Borrowing Advisory Committee – which met yesterday at the Hay Adams Hotel at 9:00 a.m. – was keenly watched to see whether Wall Street would agree or endorse the Mnuchin trial balloon.

It did not.

In fact, in the minutes released as part of the May 2 meeting, the TBAC was vocally against launching “Ultra-longs” at this moment saying “while an ultra-long is most likely to be demanded by those with longer-dated liabilities, the Committee does not see evidence of strong or sustainable demand for maturities beyond 30-years.”

The TBAC highlights the change in US TSY issuance patterns over the past three and a half decades, and notes that since 1980, the Treasury has made minimal changes to its issuance patterns: Introduced 2 new products (TIPS and FRNs); Permanently canceled 2 products (4y and 20y); Canceled and subsequently re-introduced 3 products (3y, 7y and 30y).

“The Treasury commands an issuance premium due to its regular and predictable issuance pattern: Regular and predictable means issuance happens in all interest rate environments”

The committee also notes that “Borrowers with Large Funding Programs Are Generally Less Opportunistic in
their Approach to the Market”

The TBAC further “recommended that further work be done to study these demand dynamics to get a better sense of where an ultra-long bond might price, which could be above or below the longest maturity debt issuance based on the pricing of domestic ultra-long derivatives, ultra-long bonds abroad, and theoretical models.”

Instead of rushing to issuing 50 and 100-year paper, the TBAC suggested that “regular and predictable issuance policy should remain the central consideration to minimize Treasury’s funding cost over time.” It also suggested other ways that Treasury might tap potential demand from long-duration investors. As such it recommended that “Treasury consider issuing a zero coupon 50-year bond, and coupon maturities between 10- and 30-years, preferably the reintroduction of the 20-year.”

Furthermore, the TBAC noted that it does not expect “meaningful ultra-long supply”

And while the TBAC was pessimistic about demand for 50 Year paper, it explicitly recommended against issuing a 100-year bond due to “limited pension or insurance cash flows beyond 50-years and the preferable attributes of stripped 30-year bonds to meet a similar duration as a 100-year coupon bond.”

Here is the full breakdown of TBAC recommendations on ultra-long dated paper:

After getting spooked by discussion of ultra-long dated paper in the past 24 hours, the kneejerk reaction in the 30Y to what initially appeared to be TBAC skepticism to 50 and 100 year paper, was favorable.

In a separate matter, the TBAC commented on the “potential timing and pace of the normalization process” of the Fed’s balance sheet “as well as any pricing impacts on fixed income markets.” This is what it said: “The Committee believes that the financing gap will likely need to be addressed by additional issuance that could begin in short-maturity coupons and bills. However, over a longer-period, it would likely be preferable to spread the increase in issuance across the curve in order to better stay below the overestimated maximum issuance sizes, according to the semi-annual survey of primary dealers.”

As for its thoughts on market impact, the TBAC said that studies of the impact of large scale asset purchases “were viewed as setting an upper bound for yield increases.” It added that the market expected resumption of secondary market purchases once the desired balance sheet is achieved “was also viewed as potentially mitigating the market impact.”

It also had the following discussion of market impact under a higher budget deficit:

The market impact of Fed redemptions combined with the possibility of a higher budget deficit is uncertain. The dealer survey may not be sufficiently robust to capture the impact of such large changes in new issue sizes. Moreover, studies by Fed staffers and others regarding the impact of large scale asset purchases are probably not applicable to a balance sheet unwind and, at best, provide only an upper bound of the potential market impact. In fact, the likelihood that the Fed is likely to resume secondary market purchases of Treasuries once they have achieved a “normal” balance sheet (sometime in 2020 according to our estimates) could cushion the impact in the interim. It is also worth noting that these purchases will have to account for both the typical growth in Fed liabilities (currency, etc) as well as ongoing MBS redemptions.

The conclsion: “any slowdown in the pace of Treasury redemptions could ease the market impact, as it would limit the speed at which the funding would need to be replaced by marketable borrowing.“

* * *

Aside from ultra-long dated bonds and the Fed’s balance sheet renormalization, the TBAC also discussed the government’s upcoming funding needs, “noting that the net marketable borrowing needs based on dealer estimates are higher than recent CBO estimates,” as well as a brief discussion on the potential impact of a government shutdown, saying that “Treasury could have withstood a loss of market access for an average of 7 days and would have been protected against losing market access for 5 days approximately 79 percent of the time.  The debt limit impasse of 2015 was noted as the predominant reason for Treasury missing its 5-day liquidity target 21 percent of the time.”

* * *

The TBAC presentation on Ultra long-Dated issuance is below (link)

via http://ift.tt/2p5fNhz Tyler Durden

After reaching one month highs on Monday, copper futures prices have tumbled to near 3-week lows amid slowing China credit impulse-driven economic signals (PMIs weak) and a surge in LME stockpiles.

• *LME COPPER STOCKPILES JUMP 12%, MOST SINCE MARCH 9

And the market reacted…

Additionally, as Bloomberg reports, There are also more signs of slack spot demand: immediate delivery copper’s discount to the three-month contract on the LME has widened 28 percent this week. Bigger inventories and the loosening of the copper price curve are at odds with forecasts that the copper market will move into deficit this year, Leon Westgate, an analyst at Levmet U.K. Ltd., said by phone.

“Judging by the price action and the movement in the spreads, it looks like the market might have been anticipating these deliveries,” he said.

As Guy Wolf, a London-based analyst at Marex Spectron Group, noted:

“It is about whether the tide of liquidity is going in or out, not the latest anecdote about Chinese demand or comment from a Chilean union official.”

“We think we’ll see a more sizable slowdown out of China,” says Edward Meir, an analyst at INTL FCStone in NY
“We’re a little bearish on copper for May”

via http://ift.tt/2pwtglW Tyler Durden