I spoke with one of the savviest financial people I know this morning on my way into work. He asked me for my take on why the markets’ seemed to be in such a tailspin. Before I could get into my explanation, he said, “The markets are acting completely irrational. Business is not falling off the table the way that stock prices are.” I told him that his explanation was my explanation. Fear was driving the selling with rationality having left the building. I explained that the bank rescue plan came as a surprise to Congress and they did not do a good job of selling it to the American people. The plan is certainly a rescue, but in its original form, it was not a bailout of $700 billion because the government would be buying frozen assets at greatly discounted prices and would likely make back their investment from the mortgage payments alone, let alone the fact that a house was attached to every loan. The public got up-in-arms because they were angry at not only Wall Street but also the politicians, and as a result, they inflicted their wrath on the halls of the House of Representatives. The House, sensing that they were in a no win position with the electorate, punted and voted the rescue plan down. The stock markets reacted with a vicious sell off that continues to this day, even though the plan was eventually passed. My friend asked why the sell off has continued now that the bank rescue plan had been passed. I answered that I thought there were three reasons:
- We have a real problem of liquidity and bad loans in our economy and the rescue plan will take weeks if not months to get moving, so there is still bad news almost everyday to which the markets must react. The volatility will continue until the bank rescue plan and other measures taken by the government begin to work and unfreeze liquidity.
- Bank bailouts have hit Europe, with banks in Holland, Germany, and England being bailed out in one form or another.
- The most important issue, however, is that stock traders realize that the bank rescue plan being on the front pages for nearly a week has raised the awareness of the American people to the problems in the banking system and will lead to a pullback in consumer spending. Consumers are angry and frightened, and since they represent roughly two-thirds of US GDP, the economy, which has been muddling along, will likely slow; perhaps even dip into negative territory in the coming quarters.
Consumers were already on alert before the banking crisis was on the front pages. Recently released Federal Reserve data show that for the first time since 1998, consumer debt fell in August by 3.7%.
My friend said he agreed the economy would slow but that the stock market was down over 25%, which was dramatically more than the economy would fall. He said, “How does a market get over these kinds of irrational fears.” I said that I thought the market would get over its fears, the same way it got over its greed.
Three years ago everyone thought that home prices would go up forever and everyone got in line to buy a house. The banks, particularly in the hot real estate areas, bought into the forever-rising real estate story along with their customers and they started cutting corners on assuring the creditworthiness of their home buyers. So greed took over. Prices went up everyday. Buyers started offering more for houses than the sellers were asking -- and on and on. What killed greed is that in the end you run out of foolish buyers. The higher you go, the more value-oriented people, shall we say “rational” people, drop out, so at the end it is just the greedy doing business with the greedy. Then some of the value-minded people realize that prices have gotten too high and they start selling. Pretty soon, prices start leveling off and then start down because value-minded people keep putting more real estate on the market. As prices begin to fall, the people who were still buying at the end are quickly underwater. In stocks it’s the same way. Right now some people are selling because they believe that earnings and dividends will be significantly hit by a slowing economy, which would make their stocks worth less in the short run. But the great majority of selling is being done by people who aren’t thinking about earnings or dividends at all; they are selling because the market is going down and they are afraid. Fear has seized the day and it will run its course the same way that greed did: until value-minded people step up.
So far it has not made much sense for value-minded people to get in a hurry to start buying. The markets have been getting rocked everyday, but value-minded people realize that there will come a day very soon when the sellers will run out of steam. At that point, the value-oriented buyers will begin buying and the markets will at first calm down and then begin to move higher.
Here’s a very simple reason why: the sell-off in stocks has created great values. The Dow Jones Industrials now yield over 3%. That is a higher yield than a 5 year Treasury bond. That means that investors who buy the Dow today will at least match the income from Treasury bonds and get all the growth in dividends and prices over the next 5 years for free. It is that kind of value that brings the value-minded people off the sidelines.
Another thing that would help a lot would be if the Fed and other world central banks did a coordinated rate cut.
11 comments:
Those of us who do care about dividends are not happy with BAC and HIG cutting the dividend - companies that have been anchors of the financial industry.
Now the market is discounting a GE dividend cut. Don, these are the kinds of companies that never cut dividends. So, people are angry and, yes scared.
I am a valued-oriented investor, and I feel betrayed that these dividend-cutting CEOs don't share your 'cooler head' perception of value.
With BAC, at least we now know what the cut will be. Not good news for those looking for an income stream, but good news for those looking to buy into BAC and wondering what they are getting.
As for GE, I don't think they could cut their dividend without Jeff Immelt losing his job. Not to say that both won't happen, but Jeff will be loath to let it happen.
You can go back through these blogs and find that I have critized BAC for making acquisitions on the backs of the shareholders. I will be writing a piece on BAC in the next few days, but I can tell you that I listened to the earnings conference and I could not disagree with Lewis' reason for the cut. This company will be the top company in the US in banking, investment banking, and asset management. This franchise must be protected and raising capital in the face of a slow down in the economy was a wise move. I don't like it because I'm one for rising dividends, not falling ones. But in the end, I am for successful companies that reward their shareholders over the long haul. Lewis was very apologetic about the dividend cut, and promised to begin raising the dividend as soon as business permitted. I think he will do it.
I agree that cut in the dividend would probably mean Immelt's job.
very insightful post!
Friend,
If a stock investor only looks at companies from the perspective of an equity investor, then the market moves are completely irrational.
If a stock investor looks at the current condition of the markets from a credit/fixed income position, then one can easily see why we are getting such downdrafts.
In fact, this is akin to what the credit markets have been for months--seized up is the word. The fixed markets have marveled for months at the equities and how little they had reacted to the gravity of the situation. What has happened in the past two weeks is called "catching up".
There really is a permanent disconnect between the equity and fixed worlds that only rarely is seen so clearly. When the most powerful, strongest, best companies in the world are struggling with capital requirement for day to day activities because the commercial paper market has seized, the stock isn't too appetizing!
You are absolutely correct in your assertion that there is probably nothing wrong with the companies involved. But what you need to realize for you and your client's sake is we are in the midst of a systematic breakdown. In it. Now.
Remember there is market risk and there is system risk. If you only focus on one, you will get slapped by the other. We are in a systematic crisis. In that mode, all assets are virtually the same in character because fear is the primary driver. So in this mode, all that bunk about "non-correlated" assets is truly bunk. All assets will be more correlated by the common denominator called fear.
Systematic failure is due to the excess credit in the markets that "flooded" the market's engine. So if the engine is flooded, does adding more gas help? Ah, no. So a rate cut really won't help us here. But the "bailout" that everyone hates is the sponge or rag that will hopefully sop up some of the excess "gas" so the engine will fire up again. Otherwise we have to do what all do with a flooded engine--wait for it to dry up. Frustrating as it is, cause the lawn still needs cut, the honey do list doesn't get shorter, and the weekend whittles away. Get it?? This is where we are metaphorically.
It will get pretty crazy in the next few days. Short can short again on financials, and next week is an option expiration week. It could be quite a show for the gawkers. The only rate cute I see helping us emmensely would be from Europe. We need something to shake the LIBOR back down to a reasonable level. If you have a home equity loan, please check the rate this month on the statement as most are some form of Libor+/-. Do not let that get out of hand.
Greg is a great manager and equity guy. These are the times that try men's souls. Unless you absolutely need to for business, try to limit your CNBC time. They have done a horrible job in this time of making sense of anything. They might as will be working for the National Enquirer.
I couldn't agree with IndyFriend more. The "liquidity problem" that keeps being contemplated is entirely missing the mark. Its a "leverage" problem due to a lack of underlying capital. The balance sheet shrinkage that is taking place will continue to feed off itself. And we are now seeing it feed itself throughout the globe, as the international finance community is more linked than it has ever been.
Times are scary. As the financial undercurrents are currently being addressed, we have to be mindful that there is a deep recession looming. A deep CONSUMER recession.
Normally with the panic, the value guys would be looking to take a position.
But look at Warren's stance, taking a Preferred piece rather than jumping to the bottom of the capital structure.
And if a guy like Warren, with his indicatory forever timelines and his vast amount of available cash, won't provide the capital that this market needs, who will? And why would they? Again, as Indyfriend notes, CAPITAL not LIQUIDITY, there is nowhere to go but down.
We'll get through this, we always do.
Best,
David G.
Just for clarity, which was not included in my comment above, is that the $700 billion will be nowhere near what is actually needed.
Dave G
Indy,
I cannot agree with you more that CNBC is toxic. I had not watched it in a long time. It was on in our lunch room a week or so ago. I watched for a few minutes. I was amazed at the lack of anybody in the room who had any idea of economics or long-term investing. It was all about trading, whether the market was going to be up or down that day and who could shout out the other guy. Cramer is funny, that's all I'm going to say him. I almost wrote something on it because so many people watch CNBC and CNBC has such a trader's mentality. I sometime watch Bloomberg TV. It is much more rational.
To your point on systematic risk. I understand full well that capital is king. I have looked at so many financial statements that my eyes have crossed. I can watch quarter by quarter the impact of writeoffs and increases in reserves. It's a double if not triple whammy against capital, especially when banks are leveraged. Having said, this, the news out of Britain is interesting today. I don't have all the facts, but what I have read this type of action deals with the issue of capital because the government is seeding the banks with capital. I believe this is the same type of plan used sucessfully in Sweden to solve their real estate bust. My recollection is that Swedish citizens came out of the seeding OK, as well. What is your view of the British plan?
Finally there are many great companies that have huge free cash flows. That is where we have most of our money. That has served us well over the years and I have every confidence that these companies will increasingly find buyers when investors start looking around for something substantial to put their money in.
Greg,
I think you will be right about the Brits imitating Sweden. And I think that if it works there, it might actually be tried here after all other efforts have been exhausted. Hopefully it won't come to that.
There are some great values out there for those with cash and a stomach for buying in levels.
Muni's are also compelling in anticipation of higher taxes regardless of which party wins...
Wonderful read.
As for BAC, I sold when they cut the dividend, though it was the right thing to do in the circumstances. However, it was the current management that created the circumstances.
Best Wishes,
D4L
Turning on the market depends on various crucial factors. People will talk up an indicator that has worked a few times in the past, but as soon as they do, it fails the next time or two. The experts with the best records, people like Warren Buffett and Peter Lynch, never sell short, because it is so difficult to do. No prediction will work on.
Finance blog, Finance, Economics, Corporate Finance, Personal Finance, Investing and Marketing
Post a Comment