Archive for the ‘Smart Investments’ Category

2010 – Your Last Chance

Friday, January 15th, 2010

     The economy is in the can but our politicians keep telling us that we have bottomed out and are on the upward swing.  They point to rising prices in home sales and in a stock market that has been volatile but generally upward for several months.  All true.  But the mega-trend that is behind all that improvement is the $100 billion that the government is investing in the economy each quarter as a function of the ARRA.  Actually, it is more than $100 billion because there is still funds left over in the TARP funding that is being spent and there are other funds, like the $33 billion for the war effort, extension of unemployment funding, jobs creation programs, state subsidies, etc., that are being invested in the economy.  In the worst of times, the economy will show some improvement if you dump that much money into the markets.     

Unfortunately there are some huge problems with this plan.  Here’s why.     

The ARRA - American Recovery and Reinvestment Act - of 2009 is supposed to invest $767 billion into the economy within a 2 yr period.  That works out to be about $100 billion per quarter.  It’s working.  The economy is making a slow recovery.  Jobs are returning slowly.  Banks are lending again, a little.  Cars are selling again, sort of.  Inflation has not jump too much.  The dollar has not been devalued by much, yet.  The fact that we are spending $100 billion per quarter into the economy has a lot to do with this “recovery” but there is a huge problem with this tactic.      Virtually all of the ARRA money is deficit money - money over and above what we have collected in taxes.  In January 2010 alone, we added $680 billion in deficit spending.  The national debt is well over $12 trillion today and will climb to over $14 trillion within the period of time that the ARRA is active.  Even the CBO predicts we will conservatively add $9.1 trillion by the end of this decade (2010-2019).  That will put the national debt at over $21 trillion.       

This is a huge problem that is not getting the attention it deserves because it is something that has a slow development and a slow impact but like the lava in a volcano or the water in a flood, it moves slow but has devastating effects.  This debt is real and it has its consequences.  The debt represents borrowed money on which the government pays interest.  In 2009, we paid $383.7 billion of interest payments on the national debt - that is just over 3% on the total amount.  That is also 12.79% of the approx. total $3 trillion collected in taxes for 2009.  That payment on the debt rises to $671.5 billion by 2019 or about 16.65% of the total taxes expected to be collected in that year.       

Two problems with these estimates:  One is that the expected taxes to be collected in 2019 is based on a fixed rte improvement of about 3% per year between now and then.  Because of reasons you will see below, that is probably not a true estimation.  2009 taxes collected were 12.9% lower than 2008 - not 3% higher.  A more realistic estimate is that tax income will rise thru 2010 and then decline for several years before rising again.  The net gain between 2009 and 2019 might be closer to 1.5% - if it is positive at all.     

The second problem is that, as we will see below, interest payments on the debt paid out might be higher because of inflation.  It is very likely that all this deficit spending will devalue the dollar and increase inflation making the payments cost more.  Rather than an average of about 3% interest payments, it is much more likely to be about 5% or more.       

When you recalculate the total interest paid in 2019 using these projections, we will pay out 30.2% of the total taxes collected. 

But wait there’s more…..     

The national debt number that everyone works with is the debt owed by the General Fund.  That is the working capital of operations within the government.  Any deficit to that amount represents funds spent over and above taxes collected.  That is exactly the definition of the various Trust Funds within the government.  We have $800 billion in the Federal Pension Trust Fund (FPTF) for the retirement payments to the military and civil service.  This Trust Fund is money that was collected and set aside for the federal employee pensions but then the actual money was spent by the government - leaving essentially an IOU in the FPTF.  There is no bucket of money anywhere containing that $800 billion and set aside for the federal employee pensions.  It is simply a certificate that says that at one time the total excess collected and not paid out in pensions was $800 billion but Congress paid it out in other expenses.  So this is an amount that also must be paid back and because of COLA adjustments, has an ongoing increase to it. 

But Wait There’s More….     

There is, in fact no money in any of the “trust funds” that are “managed” by congress.  The $280 billion in the Medicare Trust is also gone.  The $3.1 Trillion in the highway trust fund is also gone.  The $1.7 trillion of the Social security trust fund is also empty as it every other trust fund in our government.     

The demand for payments OUT of these trust funds is growing at a rate much faster than inflation or in the growth of the economy.  For instance, the needed major infrastructure projects that would otherwise be paid for by the highway trust fund far exceeds the current trust fund balance.  In fact, the repair or replacement of just the bridges in the US that need immediate attention exceeds the amount in the trust fund now.       

The payout from the Federal Pension Trust Fund, the Medicare and Social security Trust fund all are expected to rise very rapidly over the next 10 years as the 74 million baby boomers retire.  For instance, the $1.7 trillion trust fund money plus all the money collected in SS taxes between now and just 5 years from now will be entirely gone by 2018 unless SS benefits are significantly cut.  The average 9% rise in medical costs plus the 280 billion Medicare trust fund money plus all the money collected in Medicare taxes between now and just 5 years from now will be entirely gone by 2016 unless there is a significant cut in Medicare benefits.     

A realistic view of the actual debt and an honest estimate of the rise in cost and the expected tax income would show that in less than a decade, we will likely accumulate in excess of $25 trillion in national debt and will be paying out more than $1.25 trillion in annual interest payments or better than 1/3 of the total annual taxes collected.  That means that rather than the usually 2% or 3% reduction in the annual increase in spending, our government would have to reduce actual spending by more than 30%.  That is something that they have never even considered and certainly have nave done.  In fact, basic economics says that our economy could not survive such a major decrease in funding for entitlement and military spending programs.     

But wait, there’s more. 

As bad as this is, it is unfortunately, not the worst of it.   First you have to appreciate the really really bad timing of the ARRA.  The following is a list of the confluence of events that will all take place over the next 15 years:     

1.Since 2005, it is not just the government but the US population has spent more than they made in income.  A net negative savings rate.  It has continued every year since at increasing amounts of negative savings.  The economists refer to it as wealth spending and it comes primarily from credit cards and home mortgages.  People borrowing to pay bills for items over and above their income.  The ones most affected are the baby boomers.  This latest economic crisis may change the attitudes back to a positive savings but it also may be too late.  Retiring boomers don’t have time to save enough to cover retirement so they will rely on the equity in their homes and investments ….precisely the two assets most impacted by the current economic crisis.     

2.    74 million baby boomers are retiring right now at a rate of 10,000 per day.  That will increase to over 20,000 per day by 2015.  All of them want social security; many will need it because they have no savings.   Applications for SS benefits are up 23% in 2009 over 2008 and the rate of increase is growing.  This increase is remarkable because the oldest boomers (those born in 1946) do not reach full retirement age until 2011.  What this reflects is the massive numbers that are taking their retirement money at age 62 because they either need the money or they have retired early.  If all or even a significant part of the boomers do this, then all of the timetables you see below will have to be moved back by several years.     

3.    As many as 70% of the boomers are expected to sell their MacMansions (homes over 2,000 sq ft) and second homes (1 in every 4 boomers owns a second home) over the 2012 thru 2025 period - putting more than 650,000 homes on the market per year over and above the amount that is historical normal roll-over.  This means that home prices will plunge and stay down until we burn off this excess which is estimated to take 10 to 15 years.  During that time, new home construction will be reduced, wood sales will drop, furniture, rugs, construction jobs, etc. everything related to that industry will also trend downward for a decade or more.  In the meantime, the demand for low cost housing ($600/mo including utilities and taxes) will skyrocket but are nearly non-existent today and currently there are no plans to provide them.  These homes have the lowest profit margins and there are very few investors that are willing to build “projects” like this.  Only the government would be motivated to invest in such massive low-income housing projects and they may not have the money to do so.     

4.    The social security fund will collect $10 billion LESS than it pays out in 2010 and $9 billion less in 2011.  This is the first time that such deficit spending has occurred and it is happening far sooner than anyone has ever projected.   According to the CBO, it will go positive from 2012 thru 2015 but that is based on the CBO projections that the economy will make a continuous recovery over all of that period.  And then it will go negative permanently - in fact, it may be as much as 75 years, if ever, before it will go positive again.  The reason for it going negative for so long is that there will be so many retired people receiving SS and Medicare than there are working people.  When the SS started, there were more than 25 workers for every person receiving benefits.  In 2018, that will fall to less than 2 people.  The taxes that two people pay will not cover the benefits for one person.  However, the average boomer will get $1100 per month in SS - not enough to live on for most.       

5.    The boomers put more that $7 trillion into the stock market over the past 25 years.  As much as 30% of that was lost as a result of the current economic crisis.  This loss means that boomers will be withdrawing money sooner, faster and will run out quicker than they had planned.  What was not lost will be used to fund their retirement.  This means that the stock market will stop receiving the huge inputs of funds and will begin paying out huge amounts in dividends and cashed out stocks.  To be able to fund these withdrawals, companies will have to completely alter their financial priorities - cutting R&D (always the first to be cut out), cutting any new growth or expansions, cutting back on all non-essential expenses, and reducing their work force.  Jobs lost during this crisis will not come back for a lot of industries.  Those jobs that do come back may not last long as they will be cut as soon as the effects of no more TARP, ARRA or other government investments and as lowered consumer spending is felt.      

6.    The national debt will cause two major problems that are economic inevitabilities: (1) the value of the dollar against foreign currencies will drop and (2) inflation will skyrocket to all time highs.  This will mean that all foreign goods will increase in cost with the most effect being felt in the price of fuel - gasoline, heating fuels, airline fuel, etc.  Rising transportation costs will cause almost everything else to rise.  A really serious consequence that could happen is that OPEC decides to change from using the dollar as their base currency to using the EURO.  Right now, all oil, worldwide is purchased and sold using the value of the dollar as the currency.  If OPEC decides that the dollar is too inflated or to over-extended, then they might very well switch over to the EURO.  This has been a threat for the past 10 years and has been stopped only because of the threat of Iraq, Iran and other Middle East unrest.  We have bought the allegiance of Saudi Arabia by giving them sweetheart deals on military aircraft and other weapons and protected them with our Navy and Air Force.  If they decide they are now strong enough, their enemies are weak enough or that we cannot provide any real benefits, then they will switch to the EURO or to gold.  Either way, the devaluation of the dollar against other currencies will make the price of oil climb to over $10/gal. or more.     

7.  All 74 million boomers will want Medicare and a drug program.  The current health care reform will add to that cost by adding those 15 million lower income people that did not contribute as much to their taxes as the middle and upper class.  This is expected to add at least $1 trillion to the total bill that is already projected to vastly exceed income to cover the costs.     

8.    Because of the economic crisis, negative savings, loss of equity, stock market drop and rising costs - many boomers will try to remain in the work force but they will mostly compete with younger workers for service industry jobs at the bottom of the salary range.  When many businesses will not be expanding, the job market will be saturated - forcing many to draw welfare, food stamps, fuel, training, housing, unemployment and other subsidies - adding to the costs of both state and federal government entitlement programs.  This is over and above the payouts to entitlement programs like social security, Medicare, seniors prescription drug programs and other national subsidies.  The sheer volume of old people (mostly baby boomers) will strain every social service program in every town, city, state and nationally to beyond their ability to respond.  Projections that you will never see from the government include an estimated 20 million people might be homeless by 2020 - up from 3.5 million in 2005.       

9.     Unemployment will hit over 10% in 2010 and is expected to lower in 2011 and beyond - according to the government.  But of course, that is what you’d expect them to say.  After the ARRA and TARP and other government investments stop, job creation will stop and job losses will begin again.  But what we hear about as unemployed is not at all accurate.  They only count those that are unemployed and actively seeking employment and are doing so with the help of the government.  Those that have taken jobs only to hold them over until they can get a better job, those that have stopped looking because they have exhausted all possibilities, those that are seeking jobs outside of the government programs and those that are doing handyman, maid or other private work because they cannot find other work are all no counted.  In the future, the massive number of old people that will have to work because their social security does not cover basic living costs - will not be counted in the unemployment figures.  Real unemployment in 2010 is probably closer to 14% or 15% of the working population and despite investments and other efforts; unemployment is likely to grow to over 20% by the peak of the boomer retirement era - in 2020.      

Now - why is all this not apparent right now?  Because we are pumping $100 billion into the economy every 4 months.  The ARRA money is hiding the fact that tax receipts in every state in the union are not covering expenses.  It is hiding the fact that the SS fund is running a deficit right now.  It is hiding the fact that the housing market is already saturated with “toxic assets” even before the boomers start selling in mass.  All that plus we are recoiling from a huge financial loss and we are still ONE year away from the first boomers (born in 1946) reaching full retirement at age 65.       

What will happen in 2012, when they have spent all the ARRA money?  How fast will the impact of all of the above inevitable events take to bring the economy into a 10+ year depression?  Ask Chris Dodd and Byron Dorgan - they can see that the Ship of State is being held afloat by band-aids and threads and is leaking badly.  They are abandoning the Ship of State before they are grouped among those that will be either blamed for causing this problem or held accountable for fixing it.   It going to be a helluva mess.     

At the beginning, I said that 2010 is your last chance.  During 2010, when ARRA and TARP and other government investments are still being paid out - while the inflation has not yet taken hold - while most of the boomers are still working and while we have not yet experienced a major devaluation of the dollar - the economy will grow.  The market will climb and you can make some money in the market.  It will be volatile and it almost certainly will not last for all of 2010 but this is your last chance to make an investment in which the objective is more than preservation of the principle.       

Probably in the early part of the 4th quarter, the speculators that will try to jump the gun on inflation and reduced government spending will begin bailing out of the market and into gold or other cash equivalents.  Gold in late 2010 and for the next several years will be rising massively.  As long as the basic economy does not completely collapse, gold will be the safe haven for several years to come.  I for one will be moving into gold in the third quarter or perhaps even sooner.  I will also be carefully picking stocks and commodities that I will be selling short and buying long on to take advantage of this inevitable set of events.  When I did this coming into the Y2K event in 1999, I made a fortune.  This will be the same kind of opportunity but much bigger and it won’t be over in a few weeks.  That means that there are dozens of opportunities to make tons of money if you simply are willing to open your eyes and see the mega-trends that are really driving what is happening.  

Make Money on the Chaos

Wednesday, July 30th, 2008

Even in this chaos and financial ruin, there is room for the shrewd investor to make a profit.  These three strategies may not make you rich but it will let you survive the recession in comfort.

 

1.    Long Term Investments - If you can afford it, invest now in condos, ranch style homes and apartment buildings that have many small apartments.  There are still some places where you can buy a property and then rent it at or above the mortgage.  (that is what I did in Vermont)  There are other places that are now so depressed that real estate prices have crashed.  Small to medium size towns in which the primary employer (factory, assembly plant, mine, etc.) has left town - usually to be reestablished overseas to take advantage of cheaper labor or because foreign goods can be made cheaper.   If you find a place that is structurally sound but is a “handyman’s special”, then reduce the rent to someone in exchange for them working on the property.  I lowered the rent by $100/mo on one of my properties in Vermont in exchange for work - the tenant has since painted the entire house, landscaped the yard, installed a new furnace and hot water heater (no labor charges) and done numerous small jobs around the house.  The idea is to acquire these properties now and then rent or sell them when the boomers place their peak demand on this kind of housing - in about 10-15 years (the statistical peak will be 2019).  But be careful not to get sucked into the mass overstock of large (over 3000 sq ft) or second homes that will flood the market for a decade or more and will drive housing prices way down.  This is also not the time to invest in any real estate related stock, ETF, mutual fund or a traditional “investment property”

 

2.                  Mid-term Investments - Not all of the stock market will crash.  Those industries that are funded primarily by the federal government to provide public services (contracted medical services, outsourced housing, food and transportation) and those that cater to the geriatric market will flourish.  There will be mutual funds and ETFs specifically designed to invest in the industry of old age.  If you keep tuned in, you will know when these are first started - the mutual fund or ETF equal to an IPO - that is when to invest.  This could occur anytime in the next decade but will certainly increase in the rate of creation in the period from 2015 to 2025.  Don’t get into these any later than 2015 and don’t stay in them any later than 2023 or your will be chasing your money down a hole.  Avoid individual stocks.  The loss of high quality experienced management talent (as the boomers retire) and the rising costs of health care plans and pensions will bring down lots of companies  - even ones in the old age industry.

 

3.                  Short Term Investments - I have reported many times on the usefulness of selling short and buying long.  As we approach the depression years, this will be a very lucrative opportunity for the affected industries.  One perfect example of this is that the price of gold has risen from just over $400/oz to over $1000/oz in the past 18 months.  Taking options to sell short on gold anytime in that period would have resulted in a substantial profit.  In 2007, I took a contrary position to take advantage of the January Effect and bought an option on 1,000 oz of gold on Dec 14th when the price was $795.  I sold on January 14th at $900.  After the cost of the option and call orders, I made about $100,000 in 30 days.

 

 

 Event Investing - If you know an event is going to happen, you can profit by it“.

Housing Crash

Wednesday, July 30th, 2008

August 12, 2006  

Insurance companies and investors have actuary studies that show that people do predictable things at certain ages.  The 77 million baby boomers bought houses in the 80’s and early 90’s as they moved into their peak earning years.  As early as 1982, they were calling the rising sales a housing market bubble but by 1992, they were talking about a housing slump.  This eight-year period marks the peak house buying ages (from age 27 to 37) of the boomers.

 

Those same actuary studies indicate that it is inevitable that those same boomers will sell their homes in record numbers as the owners age, moving out of their large primary homes for a smaller home - usually seeking a ranch style (one floor) or a condo (no yard maintenance).   The so-called “empty nesters” will most often sell the larger homes (4 or more bedrooms or over 3,000 sq ft), second homes and those with high-maintenance property.  In Vermont, these are also the homes with high heating, electricity and tax costs that are likely to be sold.

 

There is another reason that the boomers will sell.  In their lifetime, most boomers have never seen a prolonged period of time when there was a major housing market crash with protracted losses in real estate investments.  In fact, under the motto of, “No one has ever lost money in real estate”, many boomers invested in their homes with the idea that it will gain in equity and, when sold, will provide a substantial boost to retirement savings, adding to the motivation to sell.  Thinking of taking advantage of large real estate appreciation of the past, a home bought in the 80’s would, by that logic, be reasonably priced in the seven figure range by the time they retired in the early to mid 2010’s.  This might have been true if there weren’t so many that had the same idea. 

 

Certainly some will keep their homes but it is a statistical certainty that more than the average quantity will sell.  As with the buying boom of the 80’s and early 90’s, this sell-off will occur over a relatively short period of about 10 years probably something like 2009 and 2019.  The laws of supply and demand dictate that prices will drop as the supply increases but unfortunately, the demand will be dropping at the same time.

 Following the baby boom of the late 40’s and 1950’s, we experienced a precipitous drop in birth rate.  This was due to the rebound from the baby boom combined with the introduction of “the pill” in 1960.  The result was a fifteen year drop in birth rates. However, many boomers decided to put career ahead of family or to have children later in life, resulting in an echo boom that diffused over a longer period of time - more than 30 years.  The end result is that anything of enduring quantity created to accommodate the volume of baby boomers will be in excess supply for more than three decades before the population will again rise to the levels to create a similar demand.  

One possible scenario – The Housing Dimple – the economic reverse of the buying boom of the 80’s:            The boomers sell-off will increase normal annual large home sales by as much as 400%.  The expected buyer population will be much less than the volume needed to maintain a modest market demand.  As a result, there will be a glut of unsold large homes on the market.  Desperate sellers will lower prices and new construction of large homes will virtually stop.  The excess supply will drive the sale price of large homes down and home values will fall dramatically.  In some of the more contested markets, a home that might have sold for $650,000 in 2005 might sell for $250,000 or less in 2015. 

 

There are, of course, lots of factors that might mitigate this kind of scenario.  There are also lots of factors that might exacerbate this scenario.  It gains credibility when you consider that this has already happened in some high value markets.  Actuary studies predict a high statistical probability that there will be implications and ramifications in real estate and in other markets and investments.  Large losses as well as gains are possible.  A prudent choice might be to plan ahead. 

    

References:

 

 http://www.realestatejournal.com/buysell/markettrends/20060619-fletcher.html?refresh=on

  

Federal Marketplace

Sunday, February 10th, 2008

Federal Marketplace

New Business Development
in the
Federal Marketplace

This is a $600+ Billion annual marketplace that sells buys goods and services from virtually every aspects of the economy from pencils to airplanes and from plumbers to computer programmers. The buyers in this market often pay top dollar and once you get a contract, it often leads to others at even larger profit margins.

The market, of course, is the federal market - all of our federal government including the Department of Defense. This article is not to tell you how to get in on this but to tell you that it exists and that there are some pretty tricky ways to take advantage of it. Let’s reveiw some examples:

Set Asides:

If you are a minority including disabled, veteran, black, Hispanic, woman or any of several other categories of “minority”, you can get preferential treatment when bidding on a government contract. All the federal government agencies are required by law to “set aside” a certain number of contract for these minorities. The part of the Federal Acquisition Regulations that applies to this program is section 8a and so this is often call the “8a program”.

Subcontractors:

Billions of dollars are spent every year on a very short list of “prime” contractors. In fact 20% of all the federal contractors get 80% of the money. Often these “primes” (like Boeing, AT&T, Lockheed-Martin, General Dynamics, etc.) play a political game as well as a bidding war with their competition. One year, Boeing beat out its competition for a $1.6 billion contract by announcing that it will subcontract a portion of the work into every State in the US. Often these subcontracts are worth 100’s of 1000’s of dollars to some small supplier of some minor component or service that is needed by the prime to deliver the service.

You can tap into this market by registering with the “small business liaisons office” of each of the primes. You can get many of the contacts online or from the SBA. You register your SIC codes as well as your size, capabilities and location. It is very possible that you can get a contract simply because of where you are located.

Vendors:

The federal agencies have their own supermarket. They call it the GSA Schedule. It is a list of products and sources that have been approved by the GSA - General Services Administration - that have been approved for sales to the government without additional contracting. For instance, if you sell software and get on the GSA Schedule, then government agencies can buy from you without each one of them having a separate contract with you. Actually, it is the GSA that has the contract with you and they are the ones that actually do the buying but it is the actual buying agency that might contact you for the sale.

You don’t have to just sell things. You can sell services also such as printing, cleaning, designing, programming and other services that are routine or maintenance in nature.

The advantage is that GSA does all your marketing and advertising for you. They publish their catalogs for all the government agencies with prices and on their web site. Its like getting listed in a Sears catalog or an ad in the phone book.

It costs to get on the GSA schedule and it takes some time to qualify but it is worth it if you are a supplier of some product or service that is in demand in the federal market.  

The “Old” Business Model

Sunday, February 10th, 2008

The “Old” Business Model

It Still Has Value!
The Old Model

The current business model that is and has been the mainstay of the business world since Edward Taylor’s time is best represented by a large “U” shaped graph in an X-Y coordinate system. The “X” axis is market share - meaning how many people are buying the product or service. The “Y” axis is profit.

The “U” shaped graph has two peaks at the top of the “U”. The inner one - the one with the high Y or profit values corresponds to businesses that compete by selling an item at good profits. But this end of the curve is also low on the “X” axis values meaning that it has little market share.

This is the “niche” market. To a small but focused market, you can sell a service for a high profit. Let’s look at the drug companies as an example. They make a drug that addresses a disease that only 10,000 people in the whole US have a need for. They ask and get $5.00 per pill. A small market that has a narrow but high demand for a product can command a high price for that product.

The other end of the “U” is also a high profit point but with much improved market share. This is characterized by Japanese autos. The price is not the lowest on the market but they still command a large market share. Why? The answer is that at this end of the graph, businesses “differentiate” themselves in some manner from their competition in order to command a price that is not the lowest. In the case of Japanese cars, the differentiation is “quality”. Buyers will pay more for perceived or real quality because that is important to them. Japanese cars have invested in both the real and perceived sense of quality.

Volvos, on the other hand, differentiate themselves as the “safe” car. Mercedes Benz is the “rich man’s car”. Land Rover is the car of choice for safaris…and so on… All these cars are significantly more expensive than their competition but they still command a large share of the market because they differentiate themselves in the eyes of the buyer.

The bottom of the “U” is characterized by low profits and only a medium market share. A good example of this is McDonald’s hamburgers which are sold at nearly the cost to make them. There is very little profit because they are so cheap. (McDonald’s, as a company, makes their profits off drinks and fries). Their market share is a portion of the fast-food market in that they are appealing to those buyers that want that kind of food, fast and cheap. This means that they are very vulnerable to price fluctuations from their suppliers and from their competition.

Another aspect of the older business model is that any given marketplace can typically support up to three top competitors. Others can and will enter the market but they will play a distant second place to the top three.

Sears-Wards-Pennys…..
Ford-Chevy-Chrysler…..
McDonalds - Burger King - Wendy’s.

In some localized markets, the top three may change but the forth one in the list will always be far down in the market share and profits from the top three. It has been a fact of business for the past 75 years…..  

High Risk Speculation

Sunday, February 10th, 2008

High Risk Speculation

Hidden High Risk Speculation
Losses

Many investors today are interested in the high flying, fast growing and most profitable investments possible. An inviolate law of economics is that high profit comes at high risk. So far, no one has been able to break that law, although many have tried or thought they had. In the long run, it has proved to be true in every case.

Unfortunately, the high risk, usually expressed as a high beta value, can be misleading because many people do not understand that in the area of investments, if you lose 10% and gain 10%, you are NOT back where you started. Let’s take an exaggerated case:

Suppose you invest $1000 in a volatile stock. As it is prone to do, it whips up and down and in the first year after you buy it, it suffers a total of a 25% loss. Being high risk, it also can go up so in the second year it ends with a 25% gain. How much money do you have? $1000? NO! You actually have $937.50. It is down more than 6%! Here’s why.

The first year’s loss of 25% of $1000 is $250 so you end the year down by that amount to $750. Now you start the second year with $750 and go up 25% or $187.50 to $937.50.

You would have to have about 34% gain in the second year to just get back to your original investment.

Now let’s take a much more conservative investment with a low beta. In this case you start with your $1,000 in a blue chip or balanced mutual fund that has a 10 year average return of 10%. At the end of the first year, at that rate, you will have $1100 and at the end of the second year you will have $1,210. That is $272.50 higher than the volatile, high risk, high return stock - or 27% better!

Of course, you invest in the high risk stock because it has more positive net returns that used in this example. More likely is fluctuations of up and down 25% but with more ups than downs but even that can be misleading. Here’s why.

Suppose the stock, from July to January, goes down 25% and then back up 45% by June of the following year. If you were to read their ad or see one of those investment magazines, it would show you a “YTD Rtd” (Year To Date Return) of 45% in the first 6 months of the second year. So you put $1,000 into this stock in July. It goes down 25% by December and you end the year with a balance of $750. But you hang in there and watch it rise from January to June by a whopping 45% - wow! Hmmmmm wait a minute - what have you really got now.

$1,000 down 25% to $750 in 6 months and then up 45% for a second 6 months gain of $337.50 to $1,087.50 by July of the second year. You end the 12 months with $12.50 LESS than the buy that invested in the conservative stock at 10% annual return!

You can change the percentage numbers and shorten or lengthen the periods of time but you get the same result. If you have a volatile stock and it incurs a loss early on in your investment, you have to have a very hard working investment to make up for it later. For instance, if you invest in a stock with an expectation of getting 10% per year but in the first year you take a 10% loss, you now need to have an average annual return of 15.7% for the remaining 4 years to get the original expected 10% average return for the 5 year period. Look at the stock ans see if that is reasonable.

The bottom line is that getting rich slower is a much safer bet. 

Boomer Employment - An Historical View

Sunday, February 10th, 2008

Boomer Employment - An Historical View

Boomer Employment
…A Look Back

In order to understand the movement of the economy and business investments, you need to understand what motivates these activities. Employment is the critical element for productivity (the GPD) and for consumption (CPI). If the workers are not working there is no productivity and no income to spend on goods and services. There is also a loss of taxes and federal investment in the economy - less Dept. of Defense spending and reduced government subsidy programs. Just the opposite is true if we have full employment. Interestingly enough, these trends and cycles are VERY predictable and therefore you can position yourself to profit from them.

In the 60’s and 70’s, as the baby boomers moved into the marketplace, the flood of labor drove labor prices down and created intense competition for jobs. The early boomers - born in the late 40’s and early 50’s - moved into and up the corporate ladder fairly easily but they were still there when the late boomers - born in the late 50’s and early 60’s - arrived. This slowed expansion and limited movement up the corporate ladder.

This and other aspects of the massive movement of the baby boomers into the labor force have had far reaching effects on our economy and on the world economy. Many of these effects are not immediately obvious.

Let’s examine some:

As the competition for jobs increased, businesses found that they did not have to pay premium rates for labor to get a good labor force. Conversely, they discovered that they could grow in size of the labor force while keeping their percentage of investment in labor about the same. This allowed many companies to grow every large at relatively modest increases in labor costs.

For awhile, the large labor market and large company sizes worked well but when normal cost of living and inflation caused labor prices to rise, the companies found they had a glut of labor that they did not need and that productivity was inefficient. This set up the stage for massive layoffs in the late 80’s and early 90’s that eliminated entire layers of management and consolidated tasks into fewer workers.

The lower labor cost prompted many companies to NOT invest in labor saving devices such as robotics in the automobile industry. Meanwhile Japan did invest in robotics and other forms of automation and labor saving devices.

When the slowly rising labor costs did push US companies to re-examine their labor situation, they found themselves no longer competitive with foreign manufacturers and labor markets. This setup the massive movement to move labor off-shore and into cheaper third-world labor markets. The loss of revenue from the labor and taxes of the lost jobs created recessions in 1975, 1980, 1982 and 1990. The median household income dropped to a 14 year low in 1982 and dipped again to 1971 levels in 1994. During that same period, personal savings as a percentage of disposable personal income dropped to record lows in the late 80’s and has continued lower every since. It hit 3.8% in 1997, the lowest level in 58 years.

Because it took time to adjust the labor market and the productivity efficiencies to the global market changes, the business inventories versus sales ratio rose to a record high in 1991 of 1.80 before falling to a low of 1.35 in 1999. This 1991 figure meant that we had more supply than demand and prices, at that time, were not competitive. This put even greater pressure to lower prices to clear out existing inventories and to control production.

For reasons not entirely clear, there has been a remarkable correlation between the percentage of the labor force that is aged 16 to 34 and inflation. As the boomers moved through this age group in the late 70’s and early 80’s we saw double digit inflation. One theory is that the politics of the economy followed the mood of the voters - at that time, being more liberal than conservative. As he boomers move into their late 40’s and 50’s, we should be able to expect a more conservative economic policy being demanded by the voters.

As the work force ages, there will be changes in how the labor is performed. For instance, one grocery chain found that its employee turnover rate dropped from 400% per year to just 80% per year when they began to hire more older workers.

The middle boom years, 1964 to 1977 when birth rates were down, will create a relative scarcity of workers that will have the reverse effect that the boomers had. Labor wages will climb as companies compete for the fewer workers available. In fact, labor costs have risen by 45% over the past 10 years. There will also be a renewed interest in capital investment in labor saving equipment such as robotics and computer automation. This has created a large rise in investments in plant and equipment since the mid 1990s. It is therefore not a surprise that in 1997, the business investment in plant and equipment as a share of total economic activity rose to a record level of 16% in 1997 (not counting WWII years).

All in all, the demographic economy of the boomer labor force has been one of intense competition in a buyers (employers) market, over supply and lowered wages. In the later retirement years of the boomers, that trend will reverse and there will be an intense competition in a sellers (employees) market, a significantly reduced market and higher wages.

It should be noted that the present economic bull years when the boomers are investing heavily in business and industry, there have been significant expansions of those businesses. This is reflected in the lowest unemployment figures in decades. Unfortunately, when the bulge of the boomer’s prime employment years pass, the period from 1964 to 1977 produced a greatly reduced birth rate. This expanded demand plus the reduced supply will drive wage prices up, unemployment will remain low and there will be a major growth in incentives and benefits to attract and keep workers.

Another inevitable outcome of this period will that employers will be willing to hire and retain older workers longer. It will no longer be out of vogue to be a late 50’s or 60’s manager or blue collar worker. These workers will need to work because their retirement money will almost certainly be insufficient.  

Technology Megatrends - Robotics

Sunday, February 10th, 2008

Technology Megatrends - Robotics

Technology Megatrends
Robotics
 

Robotics as a technology megatrend is important to you because it is one of the few technologies that you can get in on the ground floor. The beginning of the big boom in robotics is just around the corner - perhaps 3 to 5 years away. There will probably be a “Microsoft” or a “General Motors” of the robotics industry that is already in existence and has yet to attract a lot of investment attention.
If you keep your eyes and ears open, perhaps you can find that infant company that will grow to dominate what has been described as a multibillion dollar industry in the next decade. Remember, the company that makes the robots that can make your investment worth large profits may not make robots that look like people. They may be automated welding machines for auto plants or tracked vehicles for law enforcement or automatic tractors for farmers. Keep an open mind.

Background:

Robotics can be defined as any mechanical device that reduces manual labor by humans. This is obviously a simplistic perspective but it suits the purposes of this discussion. You either have cheap labor or you have expensive labor. If you have cheap labor, you have little incentive to seek out and invest in labor saving devices.

If you have expensive labor, you will seek ways to reduce the costs of the labor. That works fine until all your competitors are do the same thing to reduce labor costs.

You might also find that competition has found a way to reduce its labor costs while maintaining a very high degree of productivity, efficiency and quality. Japan did that in the early 80’s.

In the late 70’s and early 80’s, Japan was faced with a labor shortage, increased competition but a potentially large demand for its cars. To reduce costs, it invested heavily in the development of robotics for many of its auto plants. There are now plants that turn out auto parts hours a day and the entire plant employs 15 or 20 people - to watch the robots.

Japan did the same in the electronics industry. Their products dominate the markets in electronics and have challenged the American auto manufacturers in their own country by keeping quality high and costs low.

When Japan was experiencing their high labor costs, America was in the peak years of the baby boomers moving through their most productive labor years - 16 to 34 years old. All 76 million of them reached that age in the same time. This flood of the labor market held down prices for more than two decades with the effects only just now beginning to subside.

While the labor was cheap in this county, there was no incentive to seek labor saving devices. Even after Japan reduced its labor costs, the US industries did not respond until they began to lose large amounts of market share to Japanese products. Then they sought ways to reduce costs. One of those ways was to begin to move their assembly plants to other locations where labor was very cheap. The thinking was that this was cheaper than what Japan did and it avoided the problems of pollution controls and labor unions.

Unfortunately, a robot that can work 20 hours a day, 7 days a week for little more than a can of oil for pay will never be able to compete with a human worker. US auto makers underestimated the degree of efficiency and quality that a robotic force could apply to the complex assembly of cars and electronics. Despite moving 1000’s of jobs to other countries to reduce labor costs, the US businesses have never been able to compete with the quality and productivity of the Japanese robotic assembly plants.

New Motivator Coming:

American business, on average, has never been particularly smart when it comes to long range strategic planning. They are more driven by the quarterly stockholders reports and the annual fiscal balance sheets to worry about three to ten years away. As a result they almost never invest in the long term strategic development of their industry unless and until motivated by loss of profits.

Despite the massive bull market and the long running market expansion that has been flooding billions of dollars into US business, we are about to head into a much different market that will increase the pressure on many American manufacturers to invest in robotics.

Following the baby boom years of 1946 to 1964, when 76 million babies were born, there was about 13 years of reduced birth rates. In this 13 years, 41 million births occurred or about 45% of the baby boom years.

This baby lull period is now coming into the labor force as the boomers leave. In 1999, they are 22 to 35 years old while the boomers are 35 to 53 years old and beginning to move out of the labor force. By 2007, the boomers had started retiring. The net effect is that the labor force is decreasing by more than 30 million people.

There has also been a shift in attitudes and work ethics of these post-boomer babies. Many of them grew up in schools with computers and many more of them went to college than the boomers did. This effectively reduces the blue collar labor force even more. As with any limited supply, and constant or increasing demand, the cost goes up. Labor rates, as a share of real business costs have risen 45% in the last decade and will continue to rise sharply for the next 7 to 10 years - until the echo boomers (the children of the boomers) enter they work force.

The response to this gradual rise over the past decade has been a gradual rise in capital investment in plants and equipment resulting in a 1997 record high post-WWII investment of 16% of their total economic activity. That percentage will be seen as low by comparison in the next few years.

Robotics to the Rescue

With the massive investment in businesses from the boomers, the tremendous advances in technology and computer design in the past two decades, and the new motivating factors of high labor costs, intense international competition and strong market demand - many manufacturers and businesses will automate and employ robotics to keep costs down and productivity up. As a career field, robotics skills will be in high demand. As an investment, robotic machines, software and maintenance companies will out-perform the average market.  

Future of Technology

Sunday, February 10th, 2008

Future of Technology

Future of Technology and the Information Industry
(21st Century Economics may or may not agree with the statements made in this article. We have not independently verified them as we do with other examinations of future trends and events. However, it is our policy to present all sides of issues and from all of the reputable sources. You will have to judge for yourself if this MIT professor is correct)

Predictions of what will happen in the future is understandably an inexact science and must be based on a number of inputs from leading industry analyst, current trends and the activities of similar industries and leading edge industry competitors. There are, in fact, often some very predictable results from such studies and an image of the future environment can take on a reasonable form. However, this analysis must be seen as an on-going task since what the industry will become is evolving constantly.

Michael Dertouzos, Director of the Computer Laboratory at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Cambridge offer the following observations as to his expectations of where the IT industry is going in the next twenty to twenty-five years. The statements in italics reflect comments that 21st Century Economics has added based on more recent studies and our own perspective of the world. Our comments have an emphasis on energy and electricity markets because of the importance they play in the overall economy.

Technoprophecy

* Manufacturing will be reborn, as customization replaces the assembly line and local high-tech workshops supplant centralized factories. In fact, “Mass Customization” is a term recently coined to describe the way that manufacturing is doing this now. The centralized factories will survive but with significant computer automation to control the customization processes.

* Business alliances will proliferate, creating hundreds of virtual corporations that may be spread all over the globe. ExtraNets (virtual networks) connecting suppliers to producers and then directly to their customers will evolve in nearly every industry. This will support the growing Internet economy

* Office productivity will increase 200%, yet people will work longer hours with less job security. This prediction is likely now but may prove to be less true after the bulge of the baby boomers mover out of their prime working years. Every job, regardless of the activity, will require computer literacy as a core competency.

* Electronic commerce will greatly reduce the need for any cash transactions. Smart cards, EDI and other on-line transactions will almost eliminate coins and paper currency and make it easier for the government to tax you.

* Your health-care costs will plummet and your health will improve, as computers monitor your vital signs and doctors bid online to care for you. Corporate health care costs will go down while worker health will go up. Preventive care will become a hallmark of both business and the health care industry. Unfortunately, the aging population will probably drive costs to the government to the breaking point and the large excess will be passed to the population as reduced coverage and higher co-payments and premiums.

* Virtual Reality will become the new primary form of entertainment and edutainment. Virtual Reality will also invade routine business communications and advertisements. Look for it to make its first market debut in video games, then in the military and then in marketing. Entertainment will be last because of the changes needed in standards and the costs of the equipment.

* Non-lethal weapons will make warfare less deadly, but “online terrorism” and competitive business digital sabotage will proliferate requiring computer security to become a new essential staff position.

Michael Dertouzos says that “If you take all of the movies, all of the songs, all of the text, newspapers, magazines - the total represents less than 5% of the annual economy. But the office work done in the U.S.–people pushing pencils, paper, and computers — accounts for 60% of the annual U.S. economy and 50% for the 10 richest countries in the world. And that share is growing. No business will be successful if its office automation isn’t a positive, effective and efficient contributor to the organization’s productivity.

“Today we do our office work with just about the same inefficiencies [as] when we dug our streets with our hands. Looming ahead of us in the next century is an incredible opportunity to improve office work, not by 10%, but by a factor of 60 in many instances. Productivity will rise in the Information Age as it did in the Industrial Age and for the same reasons it did before: the application of new tools to relieve human work — more results from less work.”

But he warns of more missteps along the way where ill-advised IT innovations and poor implementations will under-deliver or have a negative effect on productivity. The man-machine interface is on his list as a fundamental challenge that affects the overall impact that IT will have.

The net effect will be that software developers must be much more in tune with the needs of the eventual users. This means that more than just the processing formulas have to be built into the software designs. Usability in the form of intuitive man-machine interfaces, easy to understand instructions and a true customer-oriented approach to the entire development concept must be adopted by every developer - both internal and external to the organization.

Among the effects of these design requirements is that internal IT or IS support departments must add skilled staff that are familiar with requirements analysis, user interface design and creating help or tutorial screens of complex ideas in easy to understand forms.

This report has obvious implications for employment, employers and business owners. If you are hiring or looking to be hired, these trends can affect your choices and chances. You have the opportunities to watch for these developing trends and be ready for them.  

Profit From Global Warming

Sunday, February 10th, 2008

Profit From Global Warming

GreenHouse Emissions

This report was originally created in July 1999 but is as relevant today as it was then. In fact, most of what it predicted has happened and the opportunities for profits (or not taking large losses) have increased.

What happens to our air is critical to our economy.
If it changes, even slightly, we will feel the financial, health and food effects of it. As a global megatrend, it has far reaching implications on the financial well being of every nation on earth but especially the US. For that reason, it is important to understand the forces at work here.

Life as we know it is possible on Earth because of a natural greenhouse effect that keeps our planet about 60o F warmer than it otherwise would be. Water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2 ), and other trace gases, such as methane and nitrous oxide, trap solar heat and slow its loss by re-radiation back to space. With industrialization and population growth, greenhouse gas emissions from human activities have consistently increased. These steady additions have begun to tip a delicate balance, significantly increasing the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, and enhancing their insulating effect.

A wide variety of activities contribute to greenhouse gas emissions.
Burning of coal, oil, and natural gas releases about 6 billion tons of carbon into the atmosphere each year worldwide. Burning and logging of forests contributes another 1-2 billion tons annually by reducing the storage of carbon by trees. The result is that the atmospheric level of CO2, the most important human-derived greenhouse gas, has increased 30 percent, fro m 280 to 360 parts per million (ppm) since 1860. Over the same time period, agricultural and industrial practices have also substantially increased the levels of other potent greenhouse gases — methane concentrations have doubled and nitrous oxide levels have risen by about 15 percent. These gases have atmospheric lifetimes ranging from decades to centuries; today’s emissions will be affecting the climate well into the 21st century.

The overall emissions of greenhouse gases are growing at about 1 percent per year. For millennia, there has been a clear correlation between CO2 levels and the global temperature record. Fluctuations of CO2 and temperature have roughly mirrored each other over the last 160,000 years. The current level of CO2 is already far higher than it has been at any point during this period. If current emissions trends continue over the next century, concentrations will rise to levels not seen on the planet for 50 million years.

Which countries account for the largest proportions of CO2 emissions?
In 1995, 73 percent of the total CO2 emissions from human activities came from the developed countries. The United States is the largest single source, accounting for 22 percent of the total, with carbon emissions per person now exceeding 5 tons per year. Over the next few decades, 90 percent of the world’s population growth will take place in the developing countries, some of which are also undergoing rapid economic development. Per capita energy use in the developing countries, which is currently only 1/10 to 1/20 of the U.S. level, will also increase. If current trends continue, the developing countries will account for more than half of total global CO2 emissions by 2035. China, which is currently the second largest source, is expected to have displaced the United States as the largest emitter by 2015.

Opportunities for Profit

These reports on the megatrend of global warming and ocean rise are not so much meant to present immediate investment opportunities as to alert you to an inevitable trend that will eventually affect all of us. This is not speculation but scientific fact. Unfortunately, it is not in our nature to react ro respond to events that unfold very slowly. Our government and that of many other nations will never put global warming above more immediate issues related to current economic growth and prosperity. For that reason, there will be virtually no preventive measures and no preparation for the eventual effects.

Because there are a few scientists that do understand the coming event and can foresee the impact it will have on society and our economy, they must be silenced so as to not upset the rest of us in our ignorant bliss. To that end, the government will frequently offer up studies that contradict those of established scientists so that the public will remain confused and non-responsive to the warnings. This also allows the government to push off any response until it actually begins to affect our economy - i.e., take money out of the pockets of corporate America - THEN we will address the issues and begin to prepare. Unfortunately, that will be very late in the process and little will be able to be done without major upheavals and deep changes that affect many people.

You can keep yourself informed and aware of these events and trends so that when someone offers you a deal to invest in recovered coastal land, farm real estate, long term commodity investments or other sectors of the economy that will be affected by the weather and water changes that are coming, then you will be better informed to make a decision that will possibly save you money.