TradePlacer.com Blog - stocks tag

Do Industrialized Economies Support Growth?

Fri, 24 Sep 2010 15:20:00 GMT

The book "For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization" by Charles Adams is a must read for those interested in learning how taxation has both created and destroyed civilizations. Over the course of history, governments have tried every tax strategy and tax rate imaginable from flat income taxes to taxes based on how many windows a building has. Students of history will find a clear pattern. Low and fair tax rates have fueled the creation of massive expansive empires, and repressive unfair tax rates have destroyed countries to the point at which they are no longer recognizable.

During the Pyramid age, Egyptian peasants paid 20 percent of their crops to the Pharaoh. Historically, medieval serfs and farmers revolted when tax rates exceeded 30 percent. European empires such as France and the Netherlands collected tax rates between 15 and 20 percent during the 1600's and prospered. However when those rates increased, it led to French Revolution in the late 1700's. The Roman Empire began as a free trade state, in which revenue was collected from 1 to 3 percent in property or sales taxes. However, in the last years of its decline, tax rates and inflation were so repressive that many peasants welcomed barbarians.

Although capital is often taxed at capital gains rates, global economic activity is largely defined by income derived from labor. In this spirit, it can be argued that capital will tend to flow into countries with low income tax rates and enough perceived economic and political freedom to conduct business transactions in the pursuit of happiness.

One reason why economies are able to grow is because workers are able to specialize in a particular skill and trade that skill for other services or products. This concept, known as division of labor, enables increased productivity because producers can focus on what will create the most economic value. For example suppose apples and oranges cost the same amount, but farmers are specialized in growing one or the other and can produce twice as much product in their field. The apple farmer can produce two apples and trade one with the orange farmer who produced two oranges so both would end up with more value than they could individually produce. However, if tax rates exceed 30 percent then this division of labor breaks down because the apple farmer wouldn't produce enough apples to pay the tax and trade for an orange. If tax rates exceed 50 percent, then the farmers would have to be 300 percent more productive in their specialization to make it worthwhile.

It is not a coincidence that the three largest economies have effective tax rates higher than 50 percent (including social security and other income taxes), zero economic growth, near zero interest rates, and are past the point of no return in insolvency.

Country	GDP	Currency	% of Currency Exchanged Market	Unfunded Liabilities as Percent of GDP
EU	$16.4 Trillion	Euro	42.45%	434%
US	$14.2 Trillion	Dollar	19.55%	854%
Japan	$5 Trillion	Yen	9.5%	227%
Total	$35.6 Trillion		71.5%	574%

The three largest economies in the world are in structural decline and represent 61 percent of the global economy, measured by GDP estimated at $58 trillion. Their currencies also account for 71.5 percent of the global foreign exchange market. The Swiss Franc, and British pound account for an additional 9.65 percent of the market which leaves only 20% of the remaining foreign currency market from a long list of countries.

Currency "investors" and traders are really just gamblers unless they are only seeking to hedge another business transaction. There is no fundamental basis for 80 percent of the market, and no reason why Jim Sinclair or others will be right that the US Dollar index will fall to 50 or below because all major currencies are priced against each other. However, compared to any tangible asset a severe decline in currencies is inevitable. If hyperinflation does occur, it will likely be in all major fiat currencies and be witnessed in all countries except those with a completely closed economy.

With virtually every major industrialized nation insolvent, using repressive taxation and unsound fiat currencies the implication is clear. No matter how bullish the prospects are for emerging economies – they are not large enough to sustain positive global economic growth nor do they have an alternative currency that could be used to replace foreign exchange at current levels. The reality of peak oil and other resources will cap emerging economy growth as well.

Because these global imbalances are structural, capital will continue to flee industrialized economies in favor of higher returns and lower taxes. The result will be overnight boom towns, and planned cities, but it's arguable whether much of this money will be misallocated. Precious metals could also undergo a historic revaluing as holders of majors currencies seek alternatives. It is unlikely that capital, or people anywhere in the world will be left unaffected by the ongoing and inevitable devaluing of all major currencies.

A Japanese Styled Economy is the Chosen Path

Fri, 03 Sep 2010 20:17:00 GMT

Large global imbalances both between and within nations have been well documented over the last decade and have continued to become more misaligned. While most commentators have argued why a Japanese style stagflationary reversion to the mean is unlikely, it is both the most wanted and mostly likely outcome of current imbalances. It is most wanted by policy makers and most likely for the reason that it's being targeted.

The Japanese economic model over the last 20 years is the best alternative for the Federal Reserve and other government policy makers because the alternatives are too great and terrible to imagine. If the government discontinued its intervention, the credit expansion created during the last 30 years would be completely reversed resulting in massive defaults to the point at which banking as a whole would discontinue. This is the natural force of the market. On the other hand, if the economy stalls and the government intervenes with too much force too quickly, then confidence in currencies would collapse and global hyperinflation would ensue. Either of these scenarios would risk a breakdown in society and likely change in government regime.

The Goldie-locks path would be to intervene just enough such that the dollar slowly depreciates, and financial firms slowly rebuild their balance sheets over decades. In this scenario society as a whole may slowly change, but change would be less drastic. The wealthy and powerful would benefit the most from this outcome as they would maintain their control. Meanwhile, the middle class would slowly disintegrate as pressures from all sides erode any remaining wealth and income. Make no mistake, the only deflation the Japanese have suffered is in asset prices not monetary supply. Costs will inflate including commodities, energy, transportation, and of course taxes. At the same time, income will stagnate at best or more likely fall. Interest income will remain below inflation and traditional investment performance will remain subpar. Businesses will operate with lower margins and lower returns. There will be near 0 economic growth, with near 0 interest rates, and near 0 employment growth.

Just as in Japan, the population will age and require more care. At the same time the number of children born will continue to fall, and immigration will decline as foreigners look elsewhere for opportunities. The result will be a declining population, with lower quality of services provided to them at a higher cost.

Investment Strategies for the Japanese Style Reversion to the Mean

Just as there has been over the last decade and last few weeks (depending on your perspective), there will be plenty of bull and bear markets with rallies and slides. Some traders may be able to time these correctly, but most won’t. On a grander perspective, equities will oscillate with no trend and no significant returns for long term investors. Even if bond investors aren’t slaughtered by higher rates, the best they will achieve is 2 percent return from government bonds. While commodities will rise, producers will also experience similar increases in production costs led by energy and construction. The result will be much higher commodity prices with little or no benefit to the producers. Stocks will be pressured lower by a decrease in PE ratios, stagnate dividends, and an aversion to risk. All asset classes will experience selling pressure from a change in demographics as workers retire and begin selling whatever assets they have to live off of.

Investors may seek to capitalize on the dollar carry trade by borrowing dollars and investing in other assets with higher expected returns. However, overuse of leverage could become detrimental as it did in 2008 even with undervalued assets.

Emerging markets would likely become a core component for successful investors as both the equities and bonds will likely outperform US or European based investments. Commodities will most likely continue to perform well, although their producers may not. Resource companies will have to dig and drill farther and farther into the ground to obtain less and less. Physical commodities will retain their value, but many can't be purchased and stored in large amounts. While it is feasible to buy physical gold and silver, buying soft commodities such as wheat and sugar are not practical investments for most people so it will be difficult to capture their gains. Commodity ETF's and futures will contango and slippage so they won’t track spot prices accurately. This can already be seen by comparing DBA to its underlying commodities and UNG to natural gas. Farmland itself will likely appreciate, however so will fertilizer and gas, so owning and operating a farm would not likely be as lucrative as investors expect. Precious metals will continue to outperform in this environment, because there simply isn’t any competing asset class. With interest rates near 0, there is no opportunity cost to carry gold or silver. Risks of large takedowns and possible impunitive taxes or capital controls will remain, however.

Investors may have to plan for a Japanese style reversion of imbalances that stretch into the next decade, as it is the chosen path by policy makers. Overall, profits will be harder to make and harder to keep, but they will still be available.

Some Mining Investors are Already Witnessing Hyperinflation

Wed, 28 Jul 2010 20:37:00 GMT

Some Mining Investors are Already Witnessing Hyperinflation Over the last decade, investors seeking protection from inflation have been accumulating gold and silver mining shares. Gold and silver have appreciated by more than 300 percent from their lows, so it would be logical to assume that mining shares have performed even better given their inherent leverage in earnings potential. Ironically, some of these investments have already suffered from their own hyperinflation in the form of share dilution. Just as governments have mismanaged their budgets and printed too much money; some mining companies have done the same to the detriment of their shareholders.

Coeur d' Alene (CDE), an American silver miner, is one such company. It has diluted its shares so much that on May 27, 2009 it had a reverse 10 for 1 stock split. This article will use post split adjusted figures. Governments often do the same thing with their failed fiat currencies. In the wake of Germany's Weimar Republic hyperinflation, a new Rentenmark was created that was equal to 1,000,000,000,000 of the old German Marks. While not as bad, CDE's shares outstanding have risen from 2.4 million in 1999 to over 80 million in 2009 - a factor of more than 33.

The majority of miners do issue shares in order to raise capital that is invested in projects with double digit returns; however this hasn't proven to be the case for CDE. $1000 invested in CDE in 1999 would now be worth only $440, while an investment in silver would have grown to $3300, and PAAS would have grown to $4220. Clearly not all precious metals investments are the same, and not all mining companies track the price of gold or silver over the long run.

Despite the all time highs seen in gold and a large increase in the price of silver, CDE was unprofitable in 2009 and the share price continued its long term trend downwards. Management's compensation was able to hit a new high though.

	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009
Executive Compensation	2,325,837	3,254,007	5,677,971	5,064,010	5,997,589
Dennis Wheeler, CEO of CDE	1,459,901	1,897,946	2,560,960	2,245,362	2,527,319

It is possible to be right about a major bull market, but still lose money if the wrong investments are chosen. Investors should be careful to only invest in mining companies that restrain themselves from over-dilution. Furthermore, if mining companies such as CDE lose half their value in a 10 year bull market due to share dilution, there is a significant risk that they won't survive a bear market in precious metals.

Silver May Go Lower, But it won't Stay There

Mon, 12 Jul 2010 21:39:00 GMT

One way to value something is by its replacement cost. Appraisers and insurers often use the cost to replace an investment as a baseline of value. In analyzing the silver market, one way to value silver is by measuring the real cost of producing an ounce of silver. This value does not include any premium from investment demand or industrial demand, but it provides a pricing floor because companies don't stay in business for long by losing money.

With the price of silver near its highs this decade and far from its bottom of $3, it would be easy to assume that miners are highly profitable. Considering first quarter earnings from the top four pure silver miners (PAAS,CDE,HL,SVM, Excluding SLW because it doesn't mine, and SSRI because its arguably an explorer), just how much are they earning from these high silver prices?

Company	Earnings	Silver Produced	Breakeven Silver Price
PAAS	$19.1 million	5.5 million ounces	$3.47 below spot
CDE	-$8 million	1.3 million ounces	$6.15 above spot
HL	$18.4 million	2.5 million ounces	$7.36 below spot
SVM	$9.8 million	1.08 million ounces	$9.07 below spot
Total	$39.3 million	10.38 million ounces	$4.33 below spot

The average realized sales price of the silver sold was around $16.90. Averaging the earnings and production from all four companies, the breakeven spot price of silver was $12.57. However, it should also be noted that the majority of these earnings did not actually come from silver production, but the byproduct sales of base metals. Silvercorp (SVM) recorded a negative silver cash cost of $4.61 per ounce, and Helca (HL) recorded a negative silver cash cost of $3.03 per ounce. Without sales of other metals, many of the worlds silver mines would be still unprofitable at these prices.

Miners often provide financial figures that sound too good to be true. For example, Pan American Silver's cash cost per ounce of silver net of byproduct credits was only $4.35. While this sounds fantastic, it doesn't include many other fixed and variable business costs such as infrastructure, maintenance and exploration that is vital to replace consumed resources over time.

While these mining companies have excellent potential and leverage to the silver price, their financial statements also provide a window into just how profitable they will be at lower silver prices. A 30 percent decline would render the industry unprofitable, and if prices fell further mining production would be delayed or canceled. In addition, if energy and water prices spike, or if wages rise, a similar outcome could occur. Despite rising %500 percent in the last 10 years, the price of silver is scraping its own floor.

Dow is Flat Since 1999, but Down Against Gold and Real Assets

Thu, 08 Jul 2010 13:02:00 GMT

Dust off your pom poms, the Dow has just crossed the 10,000 level to the upside. Most people aren't partying like its march 1999 though – when the Dow first crossed that level. It has crossed the same level more than 30 times over the last 11 years, and the same exuberance has worn thin.

Perhaps investors are less exuberant because the Dow today buys so much less than it did in 1999. Today's Dow 10,000 is worth less than 7,500 when factoring in the governments CPI index. Compared to the price of oil in 1999, the Dow has fallen to around 2,650, and compared to gold its worth only 2300. The Dow to Gold ratio has fallen from 37 to 8.

Not only has the Dow remained flat since 1999, it has lost anywhere between 25 and 80 percent of its value, depending on the comparison involved. The concept of compounding has remained the same, but now in reverse. Losses in both nominal and real terms compound to create larger losses.

While equities have not provided returns or protection from inflation over the last 11 years, commodities and other real assets managed to gain in value and have acted as a pillar of financial stability. Gold and silver have performed exceptionally well, and proven that it is possible to generate positive inflation adjusted returns in precious metals. In other words, gold and silver not only acted as a store of value, but also provided returns beyond that which can be discounted by a rise is prices or monetary supply. Make no mistake, over the long run precious metals are not expected to rise at a faster rate than inflation. However, buying precious metals at the right time and price can yield outstanding returns just as the Dow did from 1980 to 1999.

Where are we in this investment cycle? Gold and silver were considered too risky at 270 and 3. When they are considered no risk buys, then you can look for similarities to 1999 - and we are far from such sentiment.

Gold and Silver Meet Resistance

Tue, 29 Jun 2010 23:00:00 GMT

Conforming to the statistical odds, gold and silver have both met strong resistance levels. Gold has made several attempts at the 1260 level and been subsequently pushed back down to the 1230 area.

Silver has a much more developed band of resistance between 19 and 21 that stretches back to its 2008 highs. At this point the ceiling above silver seems impenetrable, however this 2 year band will fuel an explosive move when the level is finally pierced.

Both metals are facing strong head winds, that make their performance much more impressive when taken into consideration. Global liquidity is drying up rapidly, and equities are dragging everything lower as money managers sell assets across the board. Historically, the next 3 months are the weakest for precious metals, especially silver. The fact that both metals are threatening their long term resistance levels at such a weak period is a precursor to the next up leg that will likely begin in the fall. In the interim, the precious metals will likely correct low enough to frustrate the bulls wanting a higher price, and shallow enough to frustrate those hoping to get in at lower prices.

However, such frustrations with gold and silver are surely better than what general equities investors will endure.

Is the Market a Good Risk to Reward Bet?

Fri, 11 Jun 2010 23:05:00 GMT

Since last March, the S&P 500 has rallied from a low of 666 to over 1100. But just how much juice is left? Economic indicators have already peaked and debt on every economic level from the individual on up to governments continues to expand. While Keynesians may applaud debt growth, or even just argue that it is better than the alternative, they are missing a cardinal rule. Money diverted towards debt payments, is diverted away from income producing capital investment.

The proliferation of government expansion and debt expansion is strangling economic progression. Analysts willing to take this in account must admit that even the best case scenario will see slow growth for the foreseeable future. The burden of government and debt is too great to be ignored.

Considering this, the equity markets are likely to be capped with a hard ceiling. While the S&P could rally higher especially now that it is oversold, the risk seems larger than the reward at this point. Investors buying into this market now for a 10% gain could easily see a 20% loss before this year is over.

For those wishing to take risks by speculating, hard assets are setup for a much better risk to reward ratio. Both gold and silver have been forming price bases since last year, and could breakout by the end of the year. If for some reason the precious metals do not breakout, it would likely be due to a collapse in the stock market. In such a case, gold and silver will most likely hold up better anyways as they did in 2008. While the summer is traditionally a weak season for precious metals it may offer an excellent opportunity to accumulate silver and gold in small amounts as a hedge against the softening economy.

Gold - is it time to buy, sell, or hold?

Fri, 28 May 2010 18:46:00 GMT

Europe has joined the trillion dollar printing club, and the US stock market is lower than the one off flash crash seen on May 6th. With so much uncertainty, one this is certain - the stakes in the markets and the global economy has a whole has never been higher. The natural force of economic deleveraging is powerful, but also faced with an infinitely powerful monetary tool - the printing press.

The volatile decisive indecision of the markets has made it hard to read - such that even the experts are perplexed as to what the direction of the Dow is. One day up 200, and the next day down 200. While many are ready to jump ship from the general stock market (or already have), those same traders are trying to time the gold and silver markets.

On one hand gold is off its highs of $1250, and in a seasonally weak period. So some are hoping to pick up gold bargains at lower prices. There is also concern that a sharp correction or crash in the stock market could drag precious metals with it.

On the other hand, both gold and silver have held up exceptionally well against any correction causing some investors to buy into any price given a reasonable fear that they could launch higher soon. What if gold never falls below buying targets of $1100 or $1000?

For the long term investor who can't predict the short term swings the answer is simple. Don't buy in a single shot. Spread out orders over a period of time in a pyramid structure. If you buy 100 ounces of silver at 17, plan on buying 200 ounces at 16, and 400 at 15. This strategy will reduce risk, and give you more time to react to unpredictable events.

Is the stock market stable?

Thu, 06 May 2010 21:22:00 GMT

Today I watched in awe as the Dow Jones index fell nearly 1000 points in the blink of an eye. This was disturbing to watch, but what was even more disturbing was to watch it proceed to rise 600 points almost as quickly as it fell. The once percieved blue-chip safe index didn't just crash, it traded like an illiquid penny stock. What this proves beyond any doubt is that the US stock markets are unstable, unsafe, and heavily manipulated to benefit Wallstreet insiders.

If you are a professional wall street trader, then perhaps you enjoyed large profits from this volatility. I was able to profit from the fall. However, I believe most people invest in an attempt to find inherit value in something. Millions of people have their pensions, 401ks and other retirement assets put into the stock market. Although the majority of these people probably didn't make a trade, they are putting their trust in a system that may not deserve it.

Interestingly, Gold and silver coins held their value with much less volatility. while the equity markets bounced like a yo-yo gold was up a solid $30 and remained an anchor of value. This is yet another reason to consider trading gold and silver on Tradeplacer.com rather than volatile paper stocks.