It’s a Start

Email this post Print this post
By Jack McHugh - January 21st, 2010, 2:14AM

Good Evening: Investor complacency, a market hallmark in recent months, received a stern test today when a series of unrelated news items combined to jostle market expectations in almost every asset class. Stocks went down, Treasurys went up, the dollar shot higher, and commodities buckled. Today’s primary market drivers included poorly received earnings releases from IBM and CSX, renewed credit concerns in Greece, and an attempt by officials in China to reign in the breakneck pace of bank lending. That Massachusetts voters elected Mark Brown to fill the late Ted Kennedy’s senate seat may have been the story of the day, but the news had only a tangential effect on our markets. Pundits and strategists will debate the meaning of the message sent by the electorate in Massachusetts, but I hope his success augers a return to some semblance of fiscal sanity in Washington. It’s a long shot, one that the special interest groups from both parties will fight, but Mr. Brown’s election may just be a hopeful start to the 2010 election cycle.

IBM joined other companies (e.g. Intel) that have kicked off the Q4 earnings season by posting an earnings “beat”, only to see their stock prices get pummeled in response. Many individual stocks also suffered a similar fate during the Q3 reporting season last October/November. This recent trend of seeing companies sell off on good news stands in stark contrast to the reactions to the Q1 and Q2 reports during the middle portion of 2009. From April to August, poor earnings were often shrugged off, or even bought. And yet, though the market reactions in each period have been opposites in terms of direction, the same force was at work each time. The news was priced in. Low expectations and low stock prices gave individual names the room to rally for much of 2009, while higher expectations and higher stock prices have led to profit taking since late last year. We’re only 10 days into the latest batch of earnings news, so it’s probably too soon to tell if this trend implies a correction is coming. But it bears watching.

Of more immediate concern to investors were the news dispatches bearing overseas datelines. The fiscal situation in Greece looks to be going from simmer to boil, and credit default swaps on sovereign Greek debt blew out to new highs today (see below). How the politicians in both Greece and the EU react will determine the ultimate outcome, but the knee-jerk reaction among global investors has been to buy the dollar and sell the euro. The euro’s future trajectory will likely depend on whether Greece voluntarily imposes budgetary discipline, gets an EU bailout, or gets kicked out of the euro altogether. The only certainty is that, like California, Greece cannot continue its previously profligate ways.

The dollar also received a boost today when word came from China overnight that a select number of banks have been told to curtail their lending practices. Judging by the sudden drop in global risk appetites for stocks and commodities, one might think that all lending in China was given a “cease and desist” order. A careful read, however, reveals that officials in China simply want banks to stay within their required capital ratios. Since even somewhat responsible lending oversight is a concept foreign to U.S and European investors, they probably should be forgiven for misunderstanding the situation in China. It will take months of continued tightening to slow down the supertanker known as the Chinese economy, but the change in policy direction from easy to less easy certainly snapped Mr. Market out of his winter hibernation.

Stocks in Asia and Europe were hit to varying degrees, but the speed of the selling in the U.S. took market participants by surprise this morning. After opening 1% lower, the major averages were down some 2% after 90 minutes of trading. The indexes then bounced around near the lows for a couple of hours before staging a rally into the closing bell. The late upticks almost halved the early losses, but the averages still declined between 1.1% (S&P) to 1.5% (Russell 2000). Treasurys were firm, but while yields on government securities fell by 2 to 6 bps, credit spreads actually widened a bit. Why shriveling risk appetities should cause investors to seek the U.S. dollar is still a mystery to me, but the greenback did advance more than 1% against its major competitors. Wednesday’s biggest losers were the precious metals and energy-related commodities. The twin specters of a warming dollar and a cooling China were too much for the CRB index. It coughed up 1.4% today.

It may be too soon to gage the real impact of Mark Brown’s ascension to the U.S. Senate, especially since it is very hard to isolate the variables that go into a single ballot decision. Punching a hole next to the name of any one politician can be linked to positives (for the candidate as a person, their policies, or their party), but votes can also be negative (against the other candidate, their policies, or their party). A single punched hole can even represent a protest vote about a specific issue, or against the powers that be in Washington, D.C. But an inability to know what Massachusetts voters were truly thinking yesterday won’t stop the pundits from trying to tell us what it all means.

“It’s a repudiation of healthcare reform, a rejection of the Obama administration’s agenda, and an endorsement of the Republican platform”, partisans on the Right will thunder. “The election means very little”, will begin the tight-lipped response by partisans on the Left. “Martha Coakley was a weak candidate who ran a poor campaign. It’s a sign of how far the Republicans have fallen when they feel happy about occupying a mere 41% of the Senate”. I have a more hopeful, non-partisan take on Brown’s win. I think the voters in Massachusetts may have instead sent a two-fold message, one that combines a plea for fiscal sanity with a “throw the bums out” mentality that rejects lightning rod partisanship on both sides. Official Washington expected Bay Staters to rubber stamp any Democratic candidate who supported the adminstration’s agenda. Voters apparently didn’t like doing what many in Washington took for granted, and they sent their first Republican to the U.S. Senate in 32 years.

I’ll hazard a guess that few readers know just which Democrat ousted that Republican, one Edward Brooke, way back in 1978. It was Paul Tsongas. I bring up the late Senator for reasons other than trivia. Mr. Tsongas ran for the presidency in 1992, and, despite being a less than dynamic speaker and a poor money-raiser, Mr. Tsongas gave Bill Clinton quite a scare on the way to Mr. Clinton’s eventual nomination that year. Mr. Tsongas may have lacked political guile of the spouse to our current Secretary of State, but he won over large groups of voters by promising to tackle what was then a large U.S. budget deficit. When asked why he refused to support a middle class tax cut or multiple spending programs that other candidates offered up, Mr. Tsongas replied, “I’m not Santa Claus”.

In stark contrast to those on both sides who would pander for votes, Mr. Tsongas told would-be voters to brace themselves for the medicine that would restore fiscal discipline in Washington. This form of straight talk didn’t win him the Democratic nomination, but it tapped into resevoir of fiscal conservatism on both sides of the aisle that the major parties continue to ignore. What’s more, the appeal of Mr. Tsongas’s basic message was no fluke. Ross Perot recognized this wellspring of antipathy and used to garner 20% of the popular vote during the 1992 presidential election. Given that our deficit situation is far more perilous today than it was 18 years ago, we need more candidates than ever who are willing to tell voters they won’t be Santa Claus.

I’m not saying that Massachusetts voters were somehow trying to honor Mr. Tsongas’s memory by electing Mr. Brown. Far from it; such irony rarely exists outside of literature. But if Mr. Obama’s initial reaction is any guide, then this election may start to affect policy in positive ways (see below). Scaling back healthcare legislation so it focuses more on efficiency and cost reduction is a more sensible approach than the monstrosity laboring through Congress. Then again, as Mr. Tsongas once said in 1992, “If anyone believes the words ‘government’ and ‘efficiency’ belong in the same sentence, we have counseling available”.

I wonder if the voters of Massachusetts were sending a message to Washington that the business-as-usual, red-stained budgets from both parties would no longer be tolerated. I have no proof, but I do have hope. Imposing fiscal discipline before our nation hits the funding wall now facing Greece is change I can believe in. But I’ll settle for a “throw the bums out” attitude toward entrenched incumbents in both parties. The fear of losing tends to make politicians better listeners. Either way, it’s a start.

– Jack McHugh

Stocks, Commodities Slide as Dollar, Treasuries Gain on China

Greek Bonds Slide on Concern Investors May Shun New Debt Sales

China Asks Some Banks to Limit Lending as Loans Surge

Senator-Elect Brown Calls Himself a ‘New Breed of Republican’

Obama, Democrats Signal Readiness to Limit Health Law

Wednesday Reading

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - January 20th, 2010, 4:30PM

A few items of note today:

Fed’s Dudley: Banking System Remains Under Strain (Real Time Economics)

Meet the Madoff Minions (MoJo)

Time to cage inflation tiger, say experts (The China Daily)

Bankers’ pay in America: Disconnected

HuffPost Interviews Joseph Stiglitz

• WTF?: Apple has been in discussions with Microsoft for several weeks about making Bing the default search engine on the iPhone (BusinessWeek)

Corporate Power Nexus

NYTimes.com to launch ‘metered’ pay model in 2011 (Marketwatch)

Cool Foldable Electric Bike (Yikebike)

The Battle of the Brain (WSJ)

What are you reading?

Bloomberg Taking Stock

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - January 20th, 2010, 2:00PM

I was on Bloomberg Taking Stock yesterday with Pimm Fox — its a fun chat on the rally psychology — and the lead in music was great.

My segment starts at the 27 minute mark to about 40 minute (commercial free)

>

click for podcast

Big Banks Accused of Short Sale Fraud

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - January 20th, 2010, 1:30PM


Source:
Big Banks Accused of Short Sale Fraud
Diana Olick
CNBC, 15 Jan 2010 |

http://www.cnbc.com/id/34877347

Taxing TBTF Banks “Down to Size”

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - January 20th, 2010, 11:26AM

“The baleful reality is that the big banks, the freakish offspring of the Fed’s easy money, are dangerous institutions, deeply embedded in a bull market culture of entitlement and greed.”

-David Stockman, director of OMB under President Ronald Reagan.

>

Of all people, David Stockman has an OpEd in today’s NYT, titled Taxing Wall Street Down to Size.

Two items are noteworthy (besides his lifting my “If you want less of something, tax it.” line):

I am not sure I buy his description that taxing the TBTF banks is somehow reflective of Supply Side Economics. In my analysis, its a back door way to get regulation in that a corrupt Congress wont or cant allow.

Second, was how sharply worded his criticism of Wall Street is:

“The banking system has become an agent of destruction for the gross domestic product and of impoverishment for the middle class. To be sure, it was lured into these unsavory missions by a truly insane monetary policy under which, most recently, the Federal Reserve purchased $1.5 trillion of longer-dated Treasury bonds and housing agency securities in less than a year.”

and:

“This was a measurement of the perilous extent to which bad investments, financed by debt, had come to distort the warp and woof of the economy. Behind the worthless loans stands a vast assemblage of redundant housing units, shopping malls, office buildings, warehouses, tanning salons and fast food restaurants. These superfluous fixed assets had, over the past decade, given rise to a hothouse economy of jobs that have now vanished.”

The entire piece is well worth a read . . .

>

Previously:
Too Big To Fail Tax (January 13th, 2010)
http://www.ritholtz.com/blog/2010/01/tbtf-tax/

Source:
Taxing Wall Street Down to Size
DAVID STOCKMAN
NYT, January 19, 2010
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/20/opinion/20stockman.html

The Do’s and Don’ts of Online Publicity, For Some Reason

Email this post Print this post
By Guest Author - January 20th, 2010, 11:00AM

Lindsay Robertson is a freelance writer and editor living in Brooklyn. She currently contribute regularly to Jezebel.com and New York Magazine’s Vulture and Daily Intelligencer blogs. She has been an editor for Videogum.com – a site about TV, movies, and online video that was spun off from Stereogum.com. Lindsay also was the editor and helped to launch Comedy Central’s first blog, the Comedy Central Insider. She has written for multiple print and online publications, including GQ Magazine, Jane Magazine, Gawker.com, The New York Post, The Huffington Post, and The Black Table.

~~~

The Do’s and Don’ts of Online Publicity, For Some Reason

[This is long and obvious, but it’s been driving me nuts for years. So here is my Guide to Online Publicity (For Dummies).]

There’s a question that has been bugging me for years: why are 99% of publicists and promotion/marketing people complete useless failures when it comes to blogs and online outlets? I keep waiting for the industry to figure things out and catch up, but it never seems to happen. So I’m taking the time to write this guide. If you work in online PR or know someone who does, this is a must-read — NOT because my observations here are anything other than obvious to the bloggers and editors you’re targeting, but because they’re clearly not obvious, or even known, to seemingly most of your industry. So here are some things that are true, at least right now, and if you incorporate these concepts into your work, I promise, you will have far greater success. And also we will stop laughing at you and forwarding your emails around to each other in awe of your complete ineptitude (yep.) (Note: as someone who blogs mostly about pop culture, this guide is probably very skewed toward that field, but most of this advice is, again, so obvious to bloggers that it will probably ring true for all topics. Also, I use my own experience as examples, but not because I think I’m some sort of expert – this advice is pretty much on behalf of all bloggers.)

First, the Don’ts:

1. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE means FOR IMMEDIATE DELETE to any blogger with any influence. Period.

2. Do Not Publicize the Wrong Content: I get at least 40 emails per day asking me to listen to a band, or announcing an album or tour. These emails are often written in a convincingly personal manner, even though aside from a few personal blog posts about Neutral Milk Hotel and the Mountain Goats and my ex boyfriend’s band, I have never written about music or worked for a music blog. Just because you see me on Stereogum’s blogroll does not mean I write about music, and the most cursory research would make that obvious. Extrapolate from this lesson to all subjects, please, especially if your company also publicizes things the blogger actually IS into. I’ve put a lot of promotional companies in a direct-to-trash Gmail filter for this sin. I’d rather miss out on one item per year than clog my inbox with things I don’t care about.

3. Don’t Lie, Part 1: Similarly, this kind of thing (which I received yesterday from a real PR company) should never, ever be done. It’s all bullshit, of course, but I’ve bolded the outright lies:

Hey Lindsay!
How are you doing? I checked out your site and I love everything you have going on there. I also checked out your other sites you posted as well.  You have a lot of my favorite bands and even some I didn’t know of, but now discovered thanks to you.
I have an artist that I hope YOU will enjoy…
It’s best when pretending to write a personal email, you don’t reveal yourself to be a total phony. (Also, though I enjoy them in a FAIL way, please don’t send emails that begin “Dear Perez.”)

4. Don’t Lie Part 2: Stop Being Days Behind on Your Own Announcements, And Don’t Try to Cover it Up

Don’t wait on announcing new content – the blogosphere will find it on its own (we have these things called google alerts). Or worse, for the love of god, do not EVER send an email saying that something has just been posted (like a movie trailer, for example – this happens daily), when it’s actually been on the internet for more than, say, an hour. If you’re sending it to anyone with any idea what they’re doing, they saw your trailer (and, often, posted it on the blog you’re trying to court) DAYS AGO. And if for some reason they, I don’t know, took one day off from the internet and actually BELIEVE you that something is new and post it when it’s not, they will hate you and your company forever. Forever.

5. Mass Emails: Bad

Mass emails in general, UNLESS they’re from the artist his or herself or are sent to a carefully tended list of people with both a demonstrated interest in the subject matter and a seeming lack of prior knowledge of the news in question (and yes, you have to check) are generally frowned upon. The fact that this is not obvious is sad.

So now that that takes care of what 99% of online PR people do all day — and now that they have to stop it, what should they be doing? Is anyone out there actually doing online PR right? I can think of several people who are — and they all have the following Dos in common. One publicist in particular has impressed me enough that she basically single-handedly inspired this blog post. I won’t use her name because I suspect that a lot of what she does on behalf of her clients probably breaks the stringent rules-of-assured-suckage that most large companies enforce to their detriment, but over the years I’ve seen this person work nothing less than PR magic, often when she’s given very little to actually work with, and she’s been promoted accordingly. Here’s what I’ve learned from her.

The Dos:

1. Research is worth it: a site’s demonstrated interest in, or similar sensibility with, your topic is far more important than that site’s traffic.

Obviously, this is more of a formula (the site has to have a certain amount of traffic, obviously, to even be worth the time) than a strict rule, but not knowing about the sites you’re targeting isn’t just a momentary waste of your time and theirs: it can have a measurable long-term affect on you and your company’s credibility. If you keep ignoring their needs and shouting false alarms, like the little boy who cried wolf, eventually, your target editors and bloggers will simply tune you out.


2. Pick Eight Blogs

I went to drinks with the Brilliant Online Publicist one night, and asked her how she did such a good job while everyone else was failing. I was also curious about why she chose to invest so much time in the then pretty new (partially) TV-focused site I co-edited – frequently sending me emails about what was going on on one of her client’s shows at that very second, and asking me if I was interested in a clip. In probably the majority of cases, she’d nailed something that I actually was interested in, but hadn’t seen, because I was blogging constantly and couldn’t watch every goddamned TV show. With me, this publicist had a success rate of probably 60%, because she chose her content carefully and made sure it fit my needs. I’m sure she had a similar success rate with her other seven blogs.

Was she clairvoyant? No: she just actually READ MY BLOG and knew the kind of things I liked to write about. How did she have time to give so much attention to the needs of a then relatively small website? She told me her secret: she only publicizes to eight blogs. She picked the eight blogs that covered her client’s subject, TV, that she liked the most on a personal level, read them religiously, and only sent them only the content she thought each blog would be into. While the rest of the publicists in her company were sending out mass emails to everyone, hoping to get bites from Perez Hilton, Gawker, HuffPo, or wherever, this publicist focused on a lower traffic tier with the (correct) understanding that these days, content filters up as much as it filters down, and often the smaller sites, with their ability to dig deeper into the internet and be more nimble, act as farm teams for the larger ones. A site can be enormously influential without having crazy eyeballs, because all eyeballs are not equal. MANY times – I would say almost every time, that I posted one of her client’s items on my site, they were linked back within hours by the big guys, who probably would have tuned her out otherwise. As counter-intuitive as it might seem to publicists, the “pick eight blogs” (or however many, but a manageable number) strategy is much more successful than the throw it against the wall and see what sticks theory. It also has the added benefit of making the publicist feel like his or her hard work is meaningful, and that his or her successes are not flukes.

3. A blogger’s resistance to marketing/publicity is directly proportionate to his or her influence as a blogger.

Bloggers depend on the trust of their readers. Publicists depend on the trust of their bloggers. If someone is putting up everything you send, that blogger probably has zero influence (and might even be a spam bot.)
4. A Monkey Can Send a Mass Email: Build Relationships and Understand What Your Real Job Is

I don’t know why one of the oldest truisms of publicity, marketing, salesmanship, and basically every other field is ignored by online publicists: it’s about relationships! I’m not talking about bloggers having fragile egos, here — it doesn’t bother my ego one bit when a publicist spells my name wrong or writes me an obvious form letter or makes the “Dear Perez” gaff. I can find my own content without the help of any publicist — any blogger worth his or her job can. I just get annoyed that my time has been wasted. If a publicist shows that they know what they’re doing, the resulting surprise on behalf of the blogger/reporter/editor will lead to more attention paid to that publicists offerings. Duh. I can’t believe I even have to point this out, but publicity and blogging are (or can be, ideally) symbiotic relationships that will only be successful if the publicist considers the needs of the other party as much as their own. A publicist should ask him or herself not “How can I get my news/content on a blog?” but “What news/content do I have that this blogger will want, but doesn’t even know it yet? And especially: what do I have that’s better than what this blogger has already found on his or her own?” To paraphrase the famous Dale Carnegie quote: when you go fishing, you don’t put what you want (strawberries) on the line, you dangle what the fish wants (worms). Duh to that. Duh to this whole thing, really, but it needed to be said.

William Ackman on Kraft/Cadbury

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - January 20th, 2010, 10:48AM

Discussing Pershing Square’s stake in Kraft, with William Ackman, Pershing Square Capital Management.

Part I

Part II

Airtime: Wed. Jan. 20 2010 | 7:21 AM ET

New York Timelapse

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - January 20th, 2010, 10:00AM

Hat tip kottke

Economic data

Email this post Print this post
By Peter Boockvar - January 20th, 2010, 9:08AM

Dec Housing Starts totaled 557k annualized, 15k below expectations and down from 580k in Nov. The decline was solely led by the single family category as multi family construction rose. Single family starts fell to the lowest since May. However, single family permits rose to 508k, the most since Sept ’08 and in terms of trying to equalize supply and demand, the last thing we need is a ramp up in home building, especially with the still massive foreclosure overhang. With this said and with respect to GDP growth, residential construction in response to the pickup in permits will give it a boost, albeit temporary if existing home inventory remains high.

Dec PPI rose .2% m/o/m vs expectations of flat but ex f&f PPI was flat, .1% below forecasts. A 1.2% drop in the wholesale price of light trucks weighed on the core reading. Food prices rose by 1.4% but energy prices fell by .4%. The y/o/y gain now with headline PPI is 4.4%, the most since Oct ’08 due to an easy comparison. Core PPI is up .9% y/o/y. With the CPI already out last week, the market moving impact from PPI is limited but inflation in the pipeline is still running hot. Intermediate goods prices rose .5% m/o/m both headline and core and crude prices (initial stage of production) rose 1% headline and 5% core (yes, m/o/m). Bottom line, with respect to inflation going forward or lack thereof, it won’t come from the historical viewpoints of the output gap and the unemployment rate (thus wage pressures), it will be led by commodity prices, therefore headline inflation should be the accurate measurement.

More Foreclosure Trouble Ahead

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - January 20th, 2010, 9:00AM

The foreclosure crisis is far from over, according to RealtyTrac’s Rick Sharga. The company will release its year-end report on Thursday showing foreclosures rose 20% over the previous year. He talks with Dawn Wotapka about some trouble spots and the outlook for 2010.

45 queries. 1.081 seconds.