Home » Posts tagged 'alhambra investment partners'

Tag Archives: alhambra investment partners

Olduvai
Click on image to purchase

Olduvai III: Catacylsm
Click on image to purchase

Post categories

Post Archives by Category

The Greenspan Moon Cult

The Greenspan Moon Cult

Taking another look at what I wrote about repo and the latest developments yesterday, it may be worthwhile to spend some additional time on the “why” as it pertains to so much determined official blindness, an unshakeable devotion to otherwise easily explained lunar events.

The short version: monetary authorities as well as the “experts” describe almost perfectly risk averse behavior among the central money dealing system in outbreaks like September’s repo – but then bend over backward trying to come up with any other kind of explanation for it. The problem must be some complicated stew of otherwise benign technical issues because there’s no possible way, they tell themselves, it can be anything else. Not with bank reserves abundantly over a trillion (now rising again) and Jay Powell pleasantly whispering in their ears about the unemployment rate every other day.

It takes on religious, cult-like properties to try so hard to prove (to themselves) what has already been so thoroughly disproven.

Start with the bond market and interest rates. Over the last half decade or so, ever since Janet Yellen’s ill-advised first rate hike in December 2015 amidst a near recession, a move she immediately regretted, central bankers and Bond Kings have been on a mission to convince the world monetary policy was a tremendous success. It had to have been because it was the biggest thing ever devised and those devising it had promised it was so big the flood of “easing” couldn’t possibly fail.

Something about a printing press.

Anyway, that’s not logic so much as self-delusion and rationalizing; the fallacy of sunk costs. Rather than recognize all the warning signs that it all had indeed failed, policymakers and Economists instead convinced themselves it just needed more time.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Globally Synchronized…

Globally Synchronized…

The economic sickness is predictably spreading. While unexpected in most of the world which still, somehow, depends on central banking forecasts, it really has been almost inevitable. From the very start, just the utterance of the word “decoupling” was the kiss of death. What that meant in the context of globally synchronized growth, 2017’s repeatedly dominant narrative, wasn’t the end of synchronized as many tried to say but the end of growth.

This was more than an economic factor. A fixed system leading into full, meaningful recovery was supposed to heal more than economy. Those political extremists who had multiplied and spread while waiting for it would be revealed as illegitimate, their complaints nothing more than some form of evil “ism.” The New York Times in January 2018 succinctly described its wider significance:

A decade after the world descended into a devastating economic crisis, a key marker of revival has finally been achieved. Every major economy on earth is expanding at once, a synchronous wave of growth that is creating jobs, lifting fortunes and tempering fears of popular discontent.

Well, purported significance anyway. If globally synchronized growth was “tempering fears of popular discontent”, the risks are pretty clear should there not be any. I wrote last September what wasn’t any sort of special insight:

From 2003 to 2009, it went: globally synchronized growth, decoupling, globally synchronized downturn. From 2010 to 2012, it went: globally synchronized growth, decoupling, globally synchronized downturn. From 2013 to 2016, it went: strong global growth (not synchronized), decoupling, synchronized downturn.

Last year [2017] to this year [2018], it has gone: globally synchronized growth, decoupling. What comes next?

The answer is here before us. Yesterday, the Bank of Canada throws in the towel on its end of the global economy. Last October, the Canadians were thinking how they had to get serious with their rate hikes. Now, officials admit in all likelihood there won’t be any more.

Something sure changed.

 …click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Rate of Change

Rate of Change

We’ve got to change our ornithological nomenclature. Hawks become doves because they are chickens underneath. Doves became hawks for reasons they don’t really understand. A fingers-crossed policy isn’t a robust one, so there really was no reason to expect the economy to be that way.

In January 2019, especially the past few days, there are so many examples of flighty birds. Here’s an especially obvious, egregious one from Atlanta Fed President Raphael Bostic. He was so damn positive at the end of October just three months ago he admitted it was giving him problems wordsmithing. Two and a half months, really.

The economy is in a good place. So good, in fact, that as I was sitting down to write this speech, I struggled to come up with sufficient variations on the word “strong.” Strong has many definitions that can describe physical prowess, the intensity of an odor or flavor, and, in physics, a type of force between particles. But one definition stands out to me as particularly apt to describe the economy at this moment: strong—able to withstand great force or pressure.

And now this week:

So grassroots intelligence from Main Street and messages from Wall Street indicate heightened uncertainty and concern about the economy. But the aggregate economic data continue to paint a robust picture. What is a policymaker to conclude from these mixed signals?

To me, the appropriate response is to be patient in adjusting the stance of policy and to wait for greater clarity about the direction of the economy and the risks to the outlook.

So, maybe unable to withstand great force or pressure? You don’t go from strong to heightened uncertainty in a matter of weeks unless it wasn’t ever strong to begin with. Using the same dictionary as President Bostic, it tells me the antonym for “strong” is “weak.”

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Nothing To See Here, It’s Just Everything

The politics of oil are complicated, to say the least. There’s any number of important players, from OPEC to North American shale to sanctions. Relating to that last one, the US government has sought to impose serious restrictions upon the Iranian regime. Choking off a major piece of that country’s revenue, and source for dollars, has been a stated US goal.

In May, the Trump administration formally withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, known otherwise as President Obama’s “Iran deal.” It was widely expected that pulling out would lead to harsh sanctions against any country continuing to trade using Iranian crude oil.

At the beginning of November, the US government formally re-instated those sanctions. In a surprising compromise, it did issue a number of waivers to countries like South Korea, Greece, Japan, and even China (among several others). That meant a good bit of Iran supply would remain available on global markets as a substitute source.

It is becoming 2018’s version of the 2014 “supply glut”, a benign or nearly so excuse for oil’s otherwise shocking crash. From Bloomberg only last week:

Just in late September, some traders were predicting that global oil prices would hit $100 a barrel over the following months. Their forecasts were based on the prospect of a supply crunch due to U.S. sanctions on Iran that went into effect in November. However, America’s surprise decision to grant waivers from its restrictions to some nations sparked a collapse in crude.

On the surface, the story does seem to check out; the US government did, in fact, keep Iran open for a little while longer. That additional future supply would have to have been factored into the ongoing oil price, further pressure to the downside.

But did it “spark a collapse in crude?” Nope, a demonstrable fallacy.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

Uh Oh; In A Month Of Big Warnings, The Biggest Yet

Uh Oh; In A Month Of Big Warnings, The Biggest Yet

All better now. It’s a Christmas miracle, the plunge erased by market closure as if FDR had just been re-elected and taken the oath. The Dow is on everyone’s mind, so trading on December 26 has understandably stuck.

Stocks posted their best day in nearly a decade on Wednesday, with the Dow Jones Industrial Average notching its largest one-day point gain in history. Rallies in retail and energy shares led the gains, as Wall Street recovered the steep losses suffered in the previous session.

The sigh of relief is palpable all across the world. The BIS called the steep, worrisome liquidations up to now Yet More Bumps On The Path To Normal, and the rallies especially in stocks and oil have served to confirm the thesis. Just some minor, dare I say transitory discomfort on the road to paradise.

Is it though?

We have been watching eurodollar futures, well, forever but with even greater purpose and intent since mid-June. There is little the eurodollar curve won’t spill information about, and its inversion around then was a huge warning that whatever shook the global money network on May 29 was indeed nothing to just ignore.

Money curves are supposed to be upward sloping reflecting the risks of a healthy environment, including economic opportunity. For it to be distorted to the point of being upside down, that’s big. People have a hard time interpreting regular curves, so unhealthy ones are much more a mystery (thanks to Economics).

The specific contracts displaying eurodollar’s version of oil contango were those out several years, the 2020’s to 2021’s. For a time, the inversion extended into 2022. For the few who noticed, this didn’t seem too much to be concerned about; a far distant probability of some nonspecific hedging case. Surely the world can be fixed given two or three years.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Europe’s Economic Demise Is A Global Warning: “Tightening Conditions Are Already Causing Disruptions”

Harmful Modern Myths & Legends

Loreley Rock near Sankt Goarshausen sits at a narrow curve on the Rhine River in Germany. The shape of the bluff produces a faint echo in the wind, supposedly the last whispers of a beautiful maiden who threw herself from it in despair once spurned by her paramour. She was transformed into a siren, legend says, a tantalizing wail which cries out and lures fishermen and tradesmen on the great river to their death.

While it makes a great story for local conversation, this part of the Rhine is now treacherous for far different reasons. Drought in middle Europe has caused water levels to drop, in places like near Loreley Rock making the river unnavigable. Nearly all freight coming from the lowlands passes through here on its way to Germany’s industrial heartland.

In more ancient times, it would have been a catastrophe. In modern times, it is an inconvenience, an economic inefficiency of the kind that strikes anywhere in the world with regularity. Rather than by boat, material and goods are being diverted to railroads and highways.

Still, there are going to be costs. According to the Kiel Institute for the World Economy this will mean German GDP in Q3 2018 contracted by 0.3%. Together with disruption in Germany’s automobile industry because of its slow reaction to the worldwide harmonized light-duty vehicles test procedure, the engine of Europe is experiencing a transitory blip.

Eurostat has already put together a flash estimate for the Euro Area’s GDP in Q3. Presumably these include something for Germany, even though that specific country’s statistics bureau, Destatis, won’t release its figures until midmonth. The Continental numbers are already alarming.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

 

Europe More Than Europe: From ‘Boom’ To The Precipice of Recession

Europe More Than Europe: From ‘Boom’ To The Precipice of Recession

Data dependent, they claim. They aren’t. Mario Draghi at his last press conference admitted, “incoming information, [is] somewhat weaker than expected.” There is so much riding on the word “somewhat.” Because of the weasel, the head of the ECB told the assembled media policy normalization was unimpeded. He did so with a straight face.

Good. Europe’s QE experiment needs to end. Not because it succeeded, rather since there was no hope for it from the beginning. It was a giant waste, at best an enormous distortion. At most, it was a huge distraction from the real problem.

You have to hand it to the Germans. They seem quite capable of the more serious business of economics (small “e”). Where Economists (capital “E”) like Draghi play the game of somewhat data dependent, businesses in Germany refuse license to the same luxury. They are business dependent, meaning that if things really were booming they would act that way. And if something like recession looms, the Germans would know it.

And that’s exactly what they’ve said for much of this year particularly the past four or five months. The global economy, which heavily influences Germany’s, is heading for another downturn. For Europe as a whole, it’s a whole lot of trouble.

The European Union’s statistical body confirms today what German sentiment has been warning about. The European economy is already on the precipice of recession. The ZEW survey in September was as low as it was when Europe was last contracting. In Q3 2018, Eurostat reports that GDP expanded by just 0.16% over Q2. That was about one-third the rate in Q2, which was itself about three-quarters the gain in 2017.

Data dependent. Like the ZEW index, GDP growth was the lowest since Europe’s last recession.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Contagion

Contagion

The word contagion is easy enough to understand. Whether the spread of disease or disaster, sometimes it is difficult if not impossible to contain. In financial terms, contagion is often thought of along the lines of 2011; Greece started it and it spread throughout the rest of Southern Europe. The euro was coming apart, and what “it” was didn’t seem to matter.

The eurodollar system is not a single, monolithic whole. It features many different pieces that sometimes don’t fit together at all. There is always something wrong somewhere, even during the best of times. It is eerie in hindsight, but there was a huge outbreak of repo fails, for example, in 2001 following September 11th. It kept up for months on end, until the middle of 2002. Outside of dot-com stocks, the system didn’t crash.

Quite the contrary, while the repo market was awash in trouble the recession which had begun months before ended. Economic recovery, though tepid and shameful, emerged out of those difficulties which were at times quite severe (there were more than $1 trillion in fails the week of February 13, 2002). The dollar, in fact, would start to fall and keep on falling consistent with rapid, massive eurodollar system growth and inflation.

Contagion is where funding issues in one part of the system spillover into another; and then another. Rather than operate like a seamless global money system, the parts break down and not always one by one. Parabolic contagion, which is what September 2008 really was, can be lurking.

The effects are not always financial and economic. Two examples from this weekend remind us of this fact.

First:

Both the parties in German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s governing coalition have suffered heavy losses in a regional election, early results show.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Chart of the Week: Playing With Dominoes

Chart of the Week: Playing With Dominoes

The Great “Recession” was never a recession. It was a monetary event first and foremost, and it continues to be eleven years later. That means by and large it has been a failure of imagination. Central bankers say they’ve done this and that, but what they’ve never done, apart from actually succeed, is examine the way money actually works in this modern world. Greenspan said it in June 2000, this “proliferation of products.” What might happen if they no longer proliferate?

You’d have to imagine an answer because they have none.

In the spirit of imagination, use yours to mentally draw in below DXY or some other equivalent eurodollar signal like repo or even EFF. None of our economic problems are really that difficult. They just don’t fit in the narrow box Economists have constructed so that their DSGE models can be free from singularities. It’s nice, I suppose, eliminating infinities from certain equations (“rational” rather than adaptive expectations) but at the expense of macro competence?

It takes very little imagination, actually, to see how they really have no idea what they are doing.

The First Global Domino Tips

The First Global Domino Tips

It’s hard to believe it was only about three months ago. Time flies when disaster unfolds all around you. In early June, Brazil’s central bank arranged a press conference where its President Ilan Goldfajn would set everyone straight. The currency was falling, he admitted, but it would be easily handled by closely following the Portuguese version of the global central bank handbook.

Sometimes you just have to admire the unrivalled brazenness of these guys and gals. Or, as I put it at the time, Goldfajn just called everyone stupid. He would have to believe that of us because Brazil has been through this before. Not in some long distant past disgrace, but just a few years ago. In fact, as he spoke, Brazil still hadn’t yet begun its recovery from the last time.

I couldn’t resist what I still think was appropriate snark in response:

We are just short of five years from when the last Banco chief called a press conference in 2013 to declare pretty much the same exact thing. Only then, Banco acted and had initiated a swap program that by early 2015 had extended to more than $115 billion. It ran so smoothly, the Brazilian economy is today celebrated as the model for how all EM crises should be handled.

Just kidding. Of course not. The real crashed and with it the Brazilian economy.

Is that ahead for Brazil, repeating the nightmare? Today’s statistics for Q2 2018 aren’t looking good, not that anyone who isn’t stupid would have expected otherwise.

Brazil’s economy had been decelerating for some time before. The currency, meaning dollar, and economy go hand in hand in that regard. Both BRL as well as Brazil’s economy each fell into an obvious “L” pattern. That’s not a very good template to follow in either direction, but it makes the potential re-emerging downslope that much more precarious.

It’s Not A “Conspiracy Theory”: Here’s How Central Banks Actively Suppress The Price Of Gold

Alhambra Investment Partners CIO Jeffrey Snider returned to Erik Townsend’s MacroVoices podcast this week to discuss one of his favorite topics: How central banks’ use gold lending to manipulate their balance sheets, and also to manipulate the broader market for precious metals by sheer dint of their size, and willingness to buy and sell without any consideration for the price.

Their conversation begins with Snider explaining the history of “gold swaps” between central banks that helped birth the concept of fractional reserve lending.

The first “gold swap” conducted between the Federal Reserve and the Bank of England: The Fed handed the BOE $200 million in bullion through the New York Fed; in exchange, the BOE gave the Fed a “gold receivables” in the same amount. This is essentially an IOU that could (in theory, at least) be cashed in for gold, but allowed the Fed to keep the gold deep in its vaults. As Townsend explains, the gold is being taken out of the accounting for the balance sheet, but it’s not being removed from the accounting.

Again, in theory, one could argue that these gold receivables were, in fact, “as good as gold” because the default risk from a counter party central bank is, effectively, zero.

Essentially, what happened was the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on behalf of the Federal Reserve system made $200 million of gold bullion available to the Bank of England for its disposal in whatever transactions it might take in defending sterling at that pre-war parity price. What’s important about that is that it aids both sides of the equation.

Because the way a gold swap works is that, essentially, the central bank agent that is providing the gold exchanges it for what’s called a gold receivable.

 

 

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

F(r)actions Of Gold

F(r)actions Of Gold

The simple fact of the matter is that gold is no longer money and hasn’t been treated that way in decades. It is a frustrating and often woeful outcome, but deference isn’t a reason to color judgement. As an investment, which is more like what gold has become, it isn’t all that straight, either. Gold behaves in many circumstances erratically; often violently so. In 2008, gold crashed three times; but it also came back (and then some) three times. The metal remains stuck in some orthodox limbo of duality, sometimes acting an investment while at others, more rarely, as almost reclaiming its former status.

The junction of that dyad format is wholesale collateral. It is a difficult and dense topic because it plumbs the very depths of the wholesale arrangement – factors like leasing, swaps and collateralized lending through binary bespoke arrangements.It is there that I think it helps to form the narrative, however, starting by reviewing what the BIS was up to in late 2009 and early 2010. I am going to borrow heavily from an article I wrote in April 2013 that describes the events in question but this is one of those times when you should read the whole thing.

Back in July 2010, the Wall Street Journal caused some commotion when it happened to notice in the annual report for the Bank for International Settlements the sudden appearance of gold swap operations to the tune of 346 tons. Subsequent investigation by media outlets, including the Financial Times, reported that the BIS had indeed swapped in 346 tons of gold holdings from ten European commercial banks. That was highly unusual in that gold swaps are typically conducted between and among central banks.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

We Know How This Ends, Part 2

We Know How This Ends, Part 2

In March 1969, while Buba was busy in the quicksand of its swaps and forward dollar interventions, Netherlands Bank (the Dutch central bank) had instructed commercial banks in Holland to pull back funds from the eurodollar market in order to bring up their liquidity positions which had dwindled dangerously during this increasing currency chaos.  At the start of April that year, the Swiss National Bank (Swiss central bank) was suddenly refusing its own banks dollar swaps in order that they would have to unwind foreign funds positions in the eurodollar market.  The Bank of Italy (the Italian central bank) had ordered some Italian banks to repatriate $800 million by the end of the second quarter of 1969.  It also raised the premium on forward lire at which it offered dollar swaps to 4% from 2%, discouraging Italian banks from engaging in covered eurodollar placements.

The “rising dollar” of 1969 had somehow become anathema to global banking liquidity even in local terms.

The FOMC, which had perhaps the best vantage point with which to view the unfolding events, documented the whole affair though stubbornly and maddeningly refusing to understand it all in greater context of radical paradigm banking and money alterations.  In other words, the FOMC meeting MOD’s for 1968 and 1969 give you an almost exact window into what was occurring as it occurred, but then, during the discussions that followed, degenerating into confusion and mystification as these economists struggled to only frame everything in their own traditional monetary understanding – a religious-like tendency that we can also appreciate very well at this moment.

At the April 1969 FOMC meeting, Charles A. Coombs, Special Manager of the System Open Market Account, reported that the bank liquidity issue then seemingly focused on Germany was indeed replicated in far more countries.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

We Know How This Ends, Part 1

We Know How This Ends, Part 1

The finance ministers and representatives of central banks from the world’s ten largest “capitalist” economies gathered in Bonn, West Germany on November 20, 1968. The global financial system was then enthralled by a third major currency crisis of the past year or so and there was great angst and disagreement as to what to do about it. While sterling had become something of a recurring devaluation tendency and francs perpetually, it seemed, in disarray, this time it was the Deutsche mark that was the great object of conjecture and anger. What happened at that meeting, a discussion that lasted thirty-two hours, depends upon which source material you choose to dissect it. From the point of view of the Germans, it was a convivial exchange of ideas from among partners; the Americans and British, a sometimes testy and perhaps heated debate about clearly divergent merits; the French were just outraged.

The communique issued at the end of the “conference” only said, “The ministers and governors had a comprehensive and thorough exchange of views on the basic problems of balance-of-payments disequilibria and on the recent speculative capital movements.” In reality, none of them truly cared about the former except as may be controlled by the latter. These “speculative capital movements” became the target of focused energy which would not restore balance and stability but ultimately see the end of the global monetary system.

Some background is needed before jumping into West Germany’s financial energy. The gold exchange standard under the Bretton Woods framework had appeared to have lasted as far as this monetary conference, but it had ended in practicality long before. In the late 1950’s, central banks, the Federal Reserve primary among them, had rendered gold especially and increasingly irrelevant in settling the world’s trade finance.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

The Confidence Game Is Ending

The Confidence Game Is Ending

Immediately after the Fed hiked interest rates last Wednesday – after sitting at 0% for 7 years – markets acted pretty much as one might expect. The Fed tightens monetary policy when the economy is strong so rising stock prices, rising interest rates and a strong dollar are all things that make sense in that context. I am sure there were high fives all around the FOMC conference room. Too bad it didn’t last more than one afternoon. By the close Friday, the Dow had fallen nearly 700 points from its post FOMC high, the 10 year Treasury note yield dropped 13 basis points, junk bonds resumed their decline and the dollar was basically unchanged. Not exactly a ringing endorsement of the Fed’s assessment of the US economy.

I’m not saying the Fed’s rate hike is what caused the negative market reaction Thursday and Friday. The die for the economy has likely already been cast and right now it doesn’t look like a particularly promising roll. Raising a rate that no one is using by 25 basis points is not the difference between expansion and contraction. And a bit over a 3% drop in stocks isn’t normally much to concern oneself with; a 700 point move in the Dow ain’t what it used to be.

The pre-existing conditions for the rate hike were not what anyone would have preferred. The yield curve is flattening, credit spreads are blowing out and the incoming economic data is not improving. Inflation is running at a fraction of the Fed’s preferred rate and falling oil prices have been neither transitory nor positive for the economy, at least so far. The Fed is not unaware of this backdrop – they may not like it or acknowledge it publicly but they aren’t blind – but seems to have decided the financial instability consequences of keeping rates at zero longer are greater than any potential benefit. A sobering thought that.

…click on the above link to read the rest of the article…

Olduvai IV: Courage
Click on image to read excerpts

Olduvai II: Exodus
Click on image to purchase

Click on image to purchase @ FriesenPress