Four out of Five See Financial Reforms as Ineffectual

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - July 14th, 2010, 6:36AM

It turns out that Americans — at least 80% of them — have been paying attention:

“Americans harbor doubts that a financial-regulation bill about to be passed by Congress will do what President Barack Obama says it will: help avoid another crisis and make their finances safer.

Almost four out of five Americans surveyed in a Bloomberg National Poll this month say they have just a little or no confidence that the measure being championed by congressional Democrats will prevent or significantly soften a future crisis. More than three-quarters say they don’t have much or any confidence the proposal will make their savings and financial assets more secure.

A plurality — 47 percent — says the bill will do more to protect the financial industry than consumers; 38 percent say consumers would benefit more.”

This is politically troubling for the two dominant parties: It is bad for Democrats, who are seen as bumbling and incompetent. Despite having bigger majorities in both Houses than George W. Bush did, they were unable to pass substantial legislation without having it substantially watered down by lobbyists. But it may be worse for the GOP, who are seen as married to an intellectually bankrupt ideology, steadfast opponents of all reform, and way too cozy with Wall Street.

The unsurprising datapoint in the Bloomberg poll is that Americans favor stronger regulation by a 3-to-1 margin.

“While skeptical about the bill’s benefits, Americans don’t want a return to the days before the financial markets suffered their biggest turmoil since the Great Depression: A plurality of respondents says they have become more supportive in recent months of tougher regulations. By a three-to-one margin, Americans have grown more favorable to stronger regulation rather than less. Even Republicans have become more inclined to stricter oversight.”

The only ones surprised by that are the dolts in Congress. If ever there was a window for a third party, it would be now . . .

>

Source:
Wall Street Fix Seen Ineffectual by Four out of Five in U.S.
Rich Miller
Bloomberg, July 14 2010
http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aclRkBNnumYo&

Q2 & QE II vs. Long Term Responsibility

Email this post Print this post
By Jack McHugh - July 14th, 2010, 12:13AM

Good Evening: U.S. stocks rallied for a sixth straight day on Tuesday, as a positive start to the Q2 earnings season last night was bolstered by a successful sale of short term Greek debt this morning. As a result, the S&P 500, which looked set to probe below 1000 less than two weeks ago, is now perched just below overhead resistance at 1100. Q1 earnings reports were overshadowed this spring by a debt crisis in Greece and the other Club Med countries, one which ultimately led to an almost 20% correction in the major averages. Today’s over-subscribed 26 week bill auction in Greece therefore offered investors a pleasant mirror image to the treacherous market backdrop in late April. That the S&P had a “12 handle” going into the last batch of earnings reports and sports a “10 handle” now will make for an interesting tug of war between bullish and bearish investors as the Q2 season unfolds. Almost forgotten during the rally we’ve seen since last week is the ostensibly worsening state of the U.S. housing market. In the interest of equal time, today we will entertain a bullish — yes, bullish — outlook for home prices.

Stock prices in Asia initially were higher overnight, but a 1.5% decline in Shanghai eventually dragged the region down. Europe, however, was able to shake off the lackluster action in the Far East after Alcoa and CSX were able to report positive earnings surprises. Also giving Europe a tailwind was a successful sale of Greek T-Bills. Oversubscribed by more than 3.5 to 1, the yield at auction for 26 week Greek paper came in at 4.65% — well below the emergency bailout rate of 5% Greece received from its friends in official Europe back in May. U.S stock index futures were impressed enough by the news that they went from essentially unchanged to almost 1% higher. A weaker than expected U.S. trade deficit did little to halt the rally, and stocks were soon up more than 1% when trading commenced in New York.

Stocks rose in sawtooth fashion for most of the rest of the session, with one notable dip occasioned by the release of a negative article about Apple in Consumer Reports. Up 2% or more heading into the final 30 minutes of trading, equity indexes pulled back when the S&P failed to surmount the 1100 level. By day’s end, the major averages finished with gains ranging from 1.4% (Dow) to 3.4% (Russell 2000). No longer sought as a safe haven, Treasurys declined for a fifth day in a row. Yields were 2 to 6 bps higher across the coupon curve after a weakish 10 year note auction. The dollar also fell victim to expanding risk appetites and fell 0.75%. Benefiting from the greenback’s weakness, commodities enjoyed a fairly broad advance. Paced by gains in energy and the precious metals, the CRB index rose 1.4% on Tuesday.

After witnessing the grim parade of negative housing statistics in recent weeks, a friend asked for my opinion on housing. Upon receiving my less than rosy forecast, he asked, “where can I get a second opinion?” A second friend (thank you, Ernie) unwittingly answered the call when he sent me the piece from Credit Suisse you will find attached below. It’s good to question one’s views from time to time, and Credit Suisse does indeed have an interesting take on potentially bullish factors for housing. Unfortunately, while I found their arguments logical, they stem from what might be some faulty assumptions. Readers should at least glance at the piece before considering my counter-arguments, but here they are:

1. An easing of bank lending standards is generally helpful, but will only help housing prices if mortgage lending standards are eased — not just standards for all loans as mentioned in the piece.
2. The historical relationships of home prices to other indicators they mention (including home affordability, retail sales, etc.) are indeed real, but historical relationships tend to break down in the wake of a broken bubble — especially one of the severity we’ve experienced in the last few years..
3. A key distinction about banks holding off on selling foreclosed homeslies in whether the banks want to hold back (i.e. effectively becoming market makers) or have to hold back because they can’t sell their inventories at these prices. I’m guessing banks can value a foreclosed home on their books at almost any number they choose, but I know they have to recognize a specific loss once they actually sell it.

This distinction in #3 is critical to the entire argument Credit Suisse is making, since it is the crucial variable determining whether “shadow inventories” of homes waiting to be sold are either higher or lower than is commonly thought by market participants. I’m guessing inventories (both real and shadow) are higher than is assumed in the piece and that prices (especially at the high end) could fall further. The authors are right in saying a relapse is becoming the consensus call, but, given that their other reasons for being positive about housing are suspect in a post-bubble environment, I don’t find their overall case to be very persuasive.

What would cause me to rethink this cautious stance on housing is a sustained uptick in job creation. A falling unemployment rate obviously will heal a number of other ills as well, but it will likely be a crucial variable for home prices. Time, job creation, and letting the market clear may be the real answers for what ails housing, but our leaders in Washington might not want to wait. Patience is a virtue not often found in our nation’s capitol and November is fast approaching. Even non elected officials like Chairman Bernanke might get a hankering to do something, whether it’s due to his own anti-deflationary philosophies or an anxious phone call or two from the man living on Pennsylvania Avenue who reappointed him. Unable to further cut the funds rate, and worried that a relapse in housing might lead to a deflationary double dip, Mr. Bernanke might well decide that launching QE II is his best option. For a man who has spoken at length about the many ways a central bank can fight deflation, pushing the Easy button is almost always the preferred solution.

Buying another trillion or so of mortgage paper, or pegging interest rates for conventional fixed rate mortgages would indeed keep home affordability aloft at multi-decade highs, but the long term cost for a second short term fix of this nature might just be soaring interest rates in the years ahead. As the recent turmoil in Europe has taught us, global investors don’t look kindly upon shenanigans of the fiscal or monetary variety. If a nation could print its way to prosperity, then Argentina and Zimbabwe would be shining case studies at Harvard Business School instead of dismal poster children at the IMF. So even though our markets are girding for the short term focus inherent with yet another quarterly earnings season, let’s hope our nation starts thinking longer term for a change. Even more than austerity, responsibility is what we need in the months and years ahead.

– Jack McHugh

U.S., European Stocks Jump on Alcoa Earnings
Greek Banks Drive Bill Rates Below EU Loan Rates in Post-Crisis Sale
Ten Year Treasuries Tumble for a Fifth Day After Auction
US_House_Prices_-_Do_1

Will Mortgage-Implode Be Harrassed Into Bankruptcy?

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - July 13th, 2010, 8:00PM

Aaron Krowne writes:

Not too surprising given the mixed record of courts on anti-SLAPP, but particularly frustrating given that everything was included in our filings to address the court’s “rationale” for denying the motion:

In Bizarre Ruling, Maryland Court Denies ML-Implode.com Anti-SLAPP Motion Against Downpayment Launderer

I am left to conclude that the courts don’t really read these proceedings with anything resembling the completeness necessary to make a fair decision, and that the result would probably have been very different with a couple high-profile amici (as on our New Hampshire anti-SLAPP suit).

Anyway, we will likely have to file bankruptcy as a result (both financially and tactically), as we continue to be sued by these folks who have no legal business, for criticizing their outlawed business.

That would be very sad news indeed.

Top 20 Concert Tours

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - July 13th, 2010, 5:30PM

Via Pollstar, we get the top 20 Concert Tours ranks artists by average box office gross per city and includes the average ticket price for shows in North America. (previous week’s ranking is in parentheses).

TOP 20 CONCERT TOURS

Artist . . . . Tour Gross . . . Average Ticket Price

1. Bon Jovi; $1,905,135; $90.50,

2. (3) James Taylor / Carole King; $1,493,264; $82.93.

3. (4) Taylor Swift; $1,186,038; $61.83.

4. (6) The Black Eyed Peas; $955,149; $63.78.

5. (7) Michael Buble; $914,089; $80.76.

6. (8) Nickelback; $816,824; $62.19.

7. (10) Alicia Keys; $729,488; $78.70.

8. (New) Maxwell / Jill Scott; $697,890; $84.40.

9. (9) Muse; $666,017; $45.83.

10. (11 John Mayer; $593,125; $62.69.

11. (12) Brooks & Dunn; $574,989; $45.60.

12. (13) Neil Young; $357,036; $126.29.

13. (16) Sugarland; $354,520; $37.13.

14. (14) Carrie Underwood; $350,153; $49.12.

15. (15) Chelsea Handler; $343,796; $58.04.

16. (17) Conan O’Brien; $276,692; $61.34.

17. (18) Jeff Dunham; $250,842; $42.69.

18. (19) Norwegian Wood Festival / Mark Knopfler; $215,618; $86.81.

19. (21) Celtic Woman; $212,179; $58.00.

20. (20) Daughtry; $210,279; $39.21.

~~~

The list is based on data provided to the trade publication Pollstar by concert promoters and venue managers.

Tuesday Readings

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - July 13th, 2010, 4:12PM

These are the most interesting reads I came across today:

• Why the Doomsayers Are Wrong (WSJ)

• Crisis Awaits World’s Banks as Trillions Come Due (NYT)

• Fleck: Tech is the market’s best bet right now (MSN Money)

• Global Unemployment Rate Race (economix)

Caroline Baum: Double-Dippers Are All Wet Ignoring Yield Curve (Bloomberg)

• Mortgage-Implode to Face Bankruptcy due to SLAPP Lawsuit (ML-Implode)

• The Market Confidence Bugaboo (Dani Rodrik)

• Obscure book by British adviser becomes cult hit after Warren Buffett tip (Telegraph)

• Historic oil spill fails to produce gains for U.S. environmentalists (Washington Post)

• A Scientist Takes On Gravity (NYT)

• Porsche 918 Spyder May Cost $630,000, Top Carrera GT (Bloomberg)

What are you reading ?

Reagan’s Tax Increases

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - July 13th, 2010, 2:30PM

OK, last post on this subject:

Bruce Bartlett wrote me to fill in the full Reagan tax story (recall he was a domestic policy adviser to Reagan and was in the Treasury under President George H.W. Bush). He notes that RR began with tax cuts during the recession, but took about half of them back before his term ended. (I’ll ask him about deficit spending for another post).

Bartlett writes that:

“Reagan signed into law the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act in 1982 before the recession was even over and went on to sign 10 more major tax increases during his administration. By 1988 he had taken back half the 1981 tax cut. These tax increases were most enacted as part of budget deals that cut domestic discretionary spending. Compared to today’s Republicans, Reagan was a model of fiscal responsibility.”

He pointed me to this chart from his blog:

>

Legislated Tax Changes by Ronald Reagan as of 1988

Source: Office of Management and Budget, Budget of the United States Government, Fiscal Year 1990 (Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989), p. 4-4.

Highest Single Stock Correlation with S&P500 Since ’87

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - July 13th, 2010, 12:00PM

Is Alpha becoming Beta?

That seems to be the case lately, with a very high correlation between stocks.The WSJ noted the sync between individual names in Component Stocks’ Correlation to S&P 500 at Highest Level Since ‘87 Crash.

Hence, it is not really a “stock pickers market,” as so many know-nothing pundits are trying to tell you.

Jim Bianco blames “Macro Investing” — between ETFs, program trading, and other factors, this leads to increasing degrees of correlation.

I think its more of a sign of indecision, and traders sitting on their hands.

Here is Jim’s chart, showing the correlation between 6 other markets that are trading like SPX:

>

click for bigger chart

chart courtesy of Bianco Research

Ferguson: A U.S. Debt Crisis Is On Its Way

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - July 13th, 2010, 11:00AM

Source:
Niall Ferguson: A U.S. Debt Crisis Is On Its Way
Joe Weisenthal
Yahoo Tech Ticker Jul 12, 2010
http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/niall-ferguson-a-u.s.-debt-crisis-is-on-its-way-518725.html

Do Europeans Support Spending Cuts?

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - July 13th, 2010, 10:17AM

>

In light of our earlier post on Deficit Chicken Hawks, I found this FT article (Support for European spending cuts strong) about European support for across the board spending cuts quite fascinating:

“European governments have solid public support, at least for now, for the spending cuts they are making in an effort to boost economic recovery, according to the latest Financial Times/Harris opinion poll.

The survey also indicates that a majority of people in the European Union’s five largest countries disagree with the decision of governments to let their budget deficits rise in order to combat the financial crisis that erupted in 2008.

The poll’s results point to a fiscal conservatism among the European public that contrasts with the eagerness with which most governments ran up high deficits to protect jobs and living standards as the crisis unfolded. Moreover, the results suggest that the austerity measures now being introduced across Europe need not be politically fatal for governments as long as they give convincing explanations for their actions. However, the full impact of the austerity measures has yet to be felt in most countries.”

This not as much about personal austerity as the headline suggests.

As the chart above shows, the public strongly favors cutting: 1) Aid to developing countries 2) Military spending. When it comes to cuts that hit closer to home, the public is less sanguine. Specifically, they are less enamored about cutting 3) Healthcare; and 4) Education.

In the US and UK, defense spending is #2 on the hit list — but way below Aid to developing countries; Kind of ironic, when you think about how the military budget totally dwarfs foreign aid . . .

>

Source:
Support for European spending cuts strong
Tony Barber
FT (Brussels), July 11 2010 13:30
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/8f9e61c0-8ce2-11df-bad7-00144feab49a.html

Steinbrenner Dead at 80

Email this post Print this post
By Barry Ritholtz - July 13th, 2010, 10:00AM

44 queries. 1.015 seconds.