Obama: Bankruptcy Best Option for GM, Chrysler

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - March 31st, 2009, 9:10PM

Wow:

President Barack Obama has determined that a prepackaged bankruptcy is the best way for General Motors Corp. to restructure and become a competitive automaker, people familiar with the matter said.

Obama also is prepared to let Chrysler LLC go bankrupt and be sold off piecemeal if the third-largest U.S. automaker can’t form an alliance with Fiat Spa, said members of Congress who have been briefed on the subject and two other people familiar with the administration’s deliberations.

While Obama two days ago gave GM 60 days to come up with deeper cost and debt reductions than the biggest U.S. automaker proposed in a viability plan submitted last month, the “quick and surgical” bankruptcy his administration described as an option appears to be inevitable, the people said. Obama personally signed off on asking GM Chief Executive Officer Rick Wagoner to step down, as he did on March 29, they said.

“Our focus is on accelerating the speed of our operational restructuring and reducing liabilities and debt on the balance sheet,” GM spokeswoman Renee Rashid-Merem said in an e-mail. “GM will take whatever steps are necessary to successfully restructure our company.”

Now if he only got religion about the banks . . .

>

Source:
Obama Said to Conclude Bankruptcy Best Option for GM, Chrysler
John Hughes
Bloomberg, March 31 2009

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aUFsRbmQyiJU&

100 Days from Major Troughs

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - March 31st, 2009, 3:30PM

Credit Suisse Fixed Income Group noted the diversity of performance around the first 100 days of major
market lows in US equities.

The first of these shows the past episodes that might turn out to be the most relevant. Note that one of these is the post 1929 crash bear market rally – it just happened to be 46% or so over five months. Which is actually typical of the first year of major bull markets.

The second shows some less exciting episodes that were nonetheless significant market bottoms rather than mere staging posts towards significant new lows.

Nice chart!

>

>

Source:

The First 100 Days

Jonathan Wilmot, James Sweeney, Matthias Klein
Credit Suisse, Fixed Income Research, 26 March 2009

http://www.credit-suisse.com/researchandanalytics

NBER: Household and NFP Differences Are Cyclical

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - March 31st, 2009, 11:45AM

Shorter version:

When the NonFarm Payroll outperforms the Household Survey, its an economic expansion; When HH survey outperforms NFP, its an economic contraction (recession)

>

Longer version:

This may be a bit wonky for some of you, but its quite fascinating:

One of my longstanding peeves has been the way some bulltards cherry pick between the Household Survey (which measures Unemployment) and the Establishment Survey (which measures non-farm payroll, occasionally called job creation). Whichever is bigger is what they choose to emphasize. The folks who abuse the data that way are economic charlatans, and should be cast out as pariahs — or at the very least, ignored. Here’s why:

These two reports measure very different things. The numbers can be off by 100s of 1,000s of jobs — and still be consistent with each other.  As we have discussed all too many times, the Household survey measures:

- Agriculture and related employment;
- Uncompensated Workers;
- Unpaid Family Employees;
- Part Time Workers;
- Workers absent without pay from their jobs;
- Self employed, Work-at-home Contractors;

–none of which are counted in the Establishment (Non-Farm Payroll) Survey.

In the past, the BLS has looked at and compared the two data series. Once they made an adjustment so both surveys were counting the same thing, any gap between the two disappeared (see chart below).

However, lest we waste a good data series, the NBER looked into whether this differential had any value as an economic indicator. And according to this recent NBER paper — Exploring Differences in Employment between Household and Establishment Data — the answer is yes.

Note that the NBER is the group that determines the official beginning and ends of recessions. (The paper’s authors are from BLS, Census, and U Maryland Economic depts — they may or may not represent official NBER views).

Phillipa Dunne of the Liscio Report summed up the research thusly:

“The study demonstrates that divergences between the Current Employment Survey (aka the Establishment Survey or Nonfarm Payroll) and the Current Population Survey (aka the Household Survey) are “cyclical phenomenon,” with the CES outpacing the CPS during business-cycle expansions, and then falling back during recessions and the early stages of recoveries. The 60-year history of the ratio between the two surveys graphed below shows this clearly. (Take that, Kudlow & Co.) Also note that the ratio failed to rise during the most recent recovery, which seems to underscore the ongoing weakness in terms of employment growth.

Based on characteristics of respondents discovered in their study, the authors contend that tight labor markets create a growing number of marginal jobs that often go unreported in the Household Survey, e.g., establishments hiring short-term workers to cover busy periods, which begins to lift the Establishment Survey. As economic conditions continue to improve, workers tend to drop informal jobs (which would be reported in the CPS but not the CES) for formal jobs (that would be reported in the CES), thus widening the gap between the two surveys. These trends then reverse as economic activity falls off, with establishments laying off workers who then turn to informal employment, moving from the CES to the CPS. (see graphs below).

At first blush, that’s a reasonable interpretation of the two data series. I will see about adding this to our regular monthly charts . . .

I previously ran this graphs from BLS showing 1994-2004; Here is the updated version through 2009:

Household and Payroll Survey Employment, Seasonally Adjusted, 1994-2009

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics, February 6, 2009.

Ratio of Establishment Survey Employment to Household Survey Nonagricultural Wage and Salary Employment, 1948-2004

Source: Bowler and Morisi, 2006

>

Previously:
Redux: Household versus Establishment Surveys (July 8th, 2006)

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2006/07/redux-household-versus-establishment-surveys/

Household versus Establishment Surveys, part 42 (October 10th, 2006)

http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2006/10/household-versus-establishment-surveys-part-42/

Sources:
Exploring Differences in Employment between Household and Establishment Data
Katharine G. Abraham, John C. Haltiwanger, Kristin Sandusky and James Spletzer,
NBER Working Paper No. 14805, March 2009

http://www.nber.org/papers/w14805.pdf

The Envelope Please: NBER Study finds ratio between Establishment and Household Surveys to the Cyclical
Phillipa Dunne
The Liscio Report, March 30, 2009

http://tinyurl.com/dlkn2f

Case Shiller Index Falls 19%

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - March 31st, 2009, 10:27AM

The Case Shiller 20 city Home Price Index fell 18.97% y/o/y — the rate of decline is the most in this cycle. Both on a y/o/y and m/o/m basis, all 20 cities saw a decline. Phoenix, Vegas, SF, Miami and LA continue to lead the drop.

The cities was the smallest y/o/y fall was Dallas, followed by Denver and Cleveland. As opposed to the FHFA HPI, Case Shiller does include homes backed by non conventional mortgages but is less geographically diverse. Due to high foreclosure rates, the cities with the biggest falls in price will likely be the first to hit bottom but that bottom hasn’t been seen yet.

>

January 2009 Year Over Year Prices

As of January 2009, prices have fallen back to 2003 levels . . .

Read the rest of this entry »

Groundhog Day

Email this post Print this post
By Peter Boockvar - March 31st, 2009, 9:30AM

Like out of a scene from ‘Groundhog Day,’ Japan announced that they will unveil another stimulus plan, their 3rd in this down cycle and I don’t have enough fingers or toes to count how many stimulus plans the 2nd biggest economy in the world has had since 1990. My point is that there is no precedent whatsoever of a country’s government printing money and spending its way to prosperity, especially in the face of a massive deleveraging.

The FTSE is gaining back most of what it lost yesterday after Marks and Spencer had better than expected sales and UK consumer confidence was 5 pts higher than forecasts and rose to the most since May ’08. Mar Euro Zone CPI rose .1% less than estimated and likely clinches an ECB rate cut on Thurs. Germany’s March jobs data was weaker than expected. Case/Shiller HPI, Chicago PMI and Confidence are out today.

Market Commentary 3.31.09

Email this post Print this post
By Guest Author - March 31st, 2009, 8:59AM

Dan Greenhaus writes:

How quickly things change.  Late last week, I sent out a note detailing how March 2009 was shaping up to be one of the best months for the S&P dating back to 1950.  However, after two down days (on low volume), the S&P now finds itself up “only” 7.13% for the month which would *not* make it one of the 20 best months.  However, with futures trading higher this morning, perhaps we can get the index up into that admittedly-arbitrarily-numbered-group because the monthly performance following those months has historically been quite good.  We’ll have to wait until 4 PM to know for sure.  At the same time, we know March is going to be an up month of some amount which would make this the first up month since December but more importantly, it will be the first up month of more than 1.25% since April 2008 when the S&P was up 4.75%.  Since then, only May, August and December were positive months and each of those months saw gains that were anemic at best, especially considering the force of the declines. 
 
That said, the start to this week is jeopardizing the index’s chance of building on the gains seen over the last three weeks.  The S&P gained approximately 19.40% over the preceding three weeks and with yesterday’s large decline, I’m not sure we can put together the first four consecutive weeks of gains since September and October of 2007.  That’s right; we did not have four consecutive up weeks for the entirety of 2008.  Additionally, the S&P is on pace for its sixth consecutive quarter of losses.  This would match the longest streak dating back to 1950.  From the first quarter of 1969 until the summer of 1970, the S&P was also down for six quarters when it lost about 30%.
 
All around the world
 
With foreign markets mixed this morning, there are quite a few things worth mentioning around the world.  Beginning in Japan where the Nikkei was down just about 1.5%, the unemployment rate rose to 4.4% while the ratio of jobs for each applicant, yes they keep track of this, saw the biggest drop since 1974.  Its pretty clear at this point that Japan is going to be moving forward with another stimulus, probably 10 trillion Yen’s worth.  However, and we know this all too well, Japan has repeatedly tried to stimulate their way out of problems before to no avail.  In fact, going way back to the beginning of their lost decade, Japan embarked on no less than three stimulus packages by September 1993 the combination of which amounted to about 6% of their GDP.  What has all these stimulus packages gotten them?  The OECD is out with a report that says Japan’s public sector debt is going to approach 200% of GDP by the end of next year.  As a frame of reference, here in the US our public sector debt has been about 40% of GDP and is expected to hit about 70% after all our packages.  To be clear, that’s not a healthy level and I don’t mean to suggest we’re a-okay because we’re not at 200%.  I was pointing it out for the reverse; to demonstrate exactly how bad the situation is in Japan.
 
Over in Europe, there are a few things going on.  To begin with, German unemployment rose again, the fifth month it has done so, coming in at 8.1%.  In the UK, consumer confidence hit the highest level since May as respondents indicated lower interest rates are helping.  In company specific news, Marks & Spencer reported sales that were higher than expected, bucking the trend we’ve seen throughout Europe.  At the same time, sales aren’t going “well” per se, they just weren’t as bad as expected.  Eurozone inflation was quite modest and with the ECB set to meet later this week, I would expect yet another rate cut is all but assured in order to help the struggling economy.

2000-03 Bear Market Rallies

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - March 31st, 2009, 7:30AM

My boychik Doug Kass has a good quote in Jack Healey’s NYT column today:

This month, after the stock market staged one of its biggest rallies since the Depression, optimists like Douglas A. Kass, a prominent hedge fund manager, buzzed that the worst was over. Finally, after a 401(k)-busting, 7,722-point plunge in the Dow Jones industrial average, the stock market seemed to be escaping bear territory, the bulls argued . . .

At the beginning of 2008, Mr. Kass, known as a short-seller, saw more trouble coming and bet against the stock market. But now, he says he thinks stocks have hit a definitive bottom, and he said he was buying.

“I’ve been a bear for three years,” said Mr. Kass, general partner of Seabreeze Partners Management in Palm Beach, Fla. “This is a big change for me.” Mr. Kass said the March lows would not just represent the lowest points of the year, but “possibly a generational low.”

Last week, he wrote a note, “Why the Bears Are Wrong,” that tallied a host of hopeful conditions in the economy and the financial system. He saw potential in the Obama administration’s plan to buy $500 billion to $1 trillion in troubled assets from banks using a blend of public and private money. If it works, the move could take the strain off the banks’ struggling balance sheets and loosen credit markets, Mr. Kass said.

Nice looking chart:
>

2000-03 Bear Market Rallies

>

Source:
A Pitched Battle for Turf Between the Bears and the Bulls
JACK HEALY
NYT, March 30, 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/31/business/31market.html

The Road Not Taken (in recent years)

Email this post Print this post
By Jack McHugh - March 31st, 2009, 12:58AM

Good Evening: While I was away, the markets celebrated our government’s latest plan for ending the financial crisis. Today the stock market retreated either from exhaustion, Treasury Secretary Geithner’s warning about our nation’s banks, the Obama administration’s ouster of GM’s Rick Wagoner, or a combination of all of the above. So clear to investors only last week, the road ahead now looks like it could lead us either higher or lower. Perhaps our policy choices and how we implement them will make all the difference. I’m going to breeze through today’s market action in order to devote more space to this theme.

Markets around the world were already under pressure as the Geithner and Wagoner stories hit the tape early this morning. Stocks in the U.S. opened 3% lower across the board this morning before settling into a fairly gentle trading range. At the day’s lows, the major indexes were off between 4% and 5%, and only a minor rally in the final hour of trading prevented stocks from closing with hefty losses. Not that the NASDAQ’s closing loss of nearly 3% was much to brag about, but it certainly was better than the 4.5% decline in the Dow Transportation average. Treasurys finally caught a bid, and it wasn’t the Fed’s bid for longer dated securities that did it, either. Shorter maturities saw their yields drop by 8 bps, while 10 and 30 year yields were off by only 2 to 4 bps. The dollar also found buyers, but commodities suffered along with stocks. With crude oil and its products leading the way lower, the CRB index finished down 3.5% today.

In thinking about our markets while I was away last week, the hopes for Tim Geithner’s latest plan and the stock market rally it spawned left me wondering whether our economy and markets are now at a crossroads. At once perplexed and inspired, I pulled up Robert Frost’s famous poem, “The Road Not Taken”. Here is the fourth and final stanza:

I shall be telling this with a sigh
Somewhere ages and ages hence:
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I—
I took the one less traveled by,
And that has made all the difference.

If Mr. Market could be likened to Mr. Frost’s traveler, then what path forward will the old gentleman soon choose? Will this latest in a multitude of policy responses from the Treasury Department and Federal Reserve lead him on a self-sustaining upward journey, or will these governmental actions do little to interrupt his previous descent?

These questions are tackled from different angles in both the latest “Market Focus” from Credit Suisse and an article in today’s Wall Street Journal (see below). The CS team scours through scores of historical charts in pointing out that stocks will decisively either rally or fall from these levels; a period of sideways trading looks most unlikely in their view. The Credit Suisse researchers make a number of assumptions in their analysis, not the least of which is that the March low in stock prices represents THE bottom. From decisive lows, muses Credit Suisse, what do the next 100 days of trading look like? Out come the charts, and comparisons with 2009 are then made with most of the bottoms seen during the last 80 years. Credit Suisse leans toward a positive resolution for both equities and the global economy, but in either case, CS sees the next couple of months as crucial. The key factor, according to Credit Suisse, is that massive government intervention will enable the world to avert a depression.

Just how a modern depression might look is the subject of an article by the same title on page 2 of today’s Wall Street Journal. Author Justin Lahart trots out charts of his own to compare today’s economic statistics (best described as, according to Jim Grant, “The Great Recession”) with the brutal and seasonally unadjusted numbers produced during the Great Depression. According to the data, the U.S. has yet to match the misery of the early 1980′s, let alone approach the devastation visited upon it during the early 1930′s. I have no quibble with these facts as presented, nor do I disagree with the forecasts among economists cited in the article that a 1930′s style depression is a long shot (a 15% chance is the mean estimate). The key passage for me, however, is the following one:

“Today’s government response is a far cry from the early 1930s, when the Fed raised interest rates, the infamous Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act crushed trade and Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon’s prescription for the economy was “liquidate labor, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate.
“‘The Great Depression was a mass of policy errors that made it worse,’ says historian and investment consultant Peter Bernstein, 90. ‘This time we have our fill of policy errors, but at least they’re not making it worse.’”

To “they’re not making it worse”, I would add a simple “yet”. As much as I respect Peter Bernstein and his firsthand experience with the policy errors made during the 1930′s, I part with him on the subject of today’s policy errors. In my view, our government could easily be making things worse down the road. Whether headed by a Republican or a Democrat, our government during the past year has embarked upon a path of trying to borrow its way out of a crisis born of taking on too much debt. And, ensuring that we stay upon this road less traveled, Fed Chairman Bernanke has essentially promised to print whatever amount of money it takes to avoid the deflationary mistakes made approximately 80 years ago.

Eschewing liquidation, Mr. Bernanke seems to be choosing inflation, or at least a dollar-induced funding crisis at some future point. He doesn’t want to make the mistakes made in the past; he wants to make ones of the modern variety. If you doubt that investors will some day refuse to show up at Treasury auctions, I would refer you to last week’s failed auction of British Gilts as a harbinger of things to come should global investors come to doubt the wisdom of debt issuance cum monetization. The Fed can manipulate either the quantity of money (bank reserves) or its price (interest rates) — but not both. Mr. Bernanke is now trying to control both. I’m no economist, but this approach will only work if our creditors willingly suspend their disbelief. At some point the dollar might just cry “Uncle”, or long term interest rates might inconveniently rise to the point of choking off whatever monetarily induced economic recovery has taken root. If the “dollar standard” is ever abandoned, then both could happen at once.

Then what? What is the policy prescription for a world in which THE reserve currency is no longer trusted? Let me say that this suboptimal scenario is not a prediction; it is only one possible outcome from our government’s choice of the policy road “less traveled by”. We should also remember that, against a very different global economic backdrop, Japan did indeed choose a similar path to the one we now seem to be taking. Given that land of the rising sun has seen many false dawns in almost two lost decades, the road of borrow-to-stimulate-then-monetize has indeed “made all the difference”.

To avoid a depression, one that is either Great or long-lived, then the U.S. will have to be a bit more responsible (read: shared pain among stockholders and bondholders, management and labor — kind of like GM). Being the steward of the currency system known as the “dollar standard” demands that the U.S. encourages increased saving and a concurrent decline in borrowing and spending. The role played by China (and other Asian nations) should be an opposing one: Gradually reduce the hoarding of dollar assets, encourage domestic consumption, and let its currency rise over time. Rather than fixate over whether the road ahead will lead to either rising or falling asset prices, perhaps the best road to take would be the high one. It has certainly been less traveled in recent years.

– Jack McHugh

U.S. Markets Wrap: Stocks Drop Most in Three Weeks, Bonds Gain

Obama Says GM, Chrysler Have Last Chance to Survive

Geithner Says Some Banks Need ‘Large Amounts’ of Assistance

How a Modern Depression Might Look — If the U.S. Gets There

market_focus_the_first_100_days

G.M. Stands For . . .

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - March 30th, 2009, 4:30PM

OK, time to crowdsource some comedy from your creative minds.

So far, we know that GM stands for:

Government Motors

Gimme Money

Anything else? Use comments for suggestions . . .

Adding Up the Bailout Total

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - March 30th, 2009, 3:42PM

Nice interactive chart at CNN/ Money:

>

via CNN/Money

46 queries. 1.124 seconds.