Investing in Banks

A Lesson in Punctuation

An English professor wrote the words, “a woman without her man is nothing” on the blackboard and directed the students to punctuate it correctly.

The men wrote: “A woman, without her man, is nothing.”

The women wrote: “A woman: without her, man is nothing.”

A reader has asked me a question about investing in banks. Unfortunately I avoid banks because I believe banks are a speculation on a bank management’s ability to make prudent, rational lending decisions combined with the whims of Federal Reserve policy. You have the risks of “bank runs” due to fractional reserve banking. (I can’t value the bank or normalize earnings or ROIC so I do what a pretty girl at a bar would do–just say, NO!) However, understanding how the banking system works is critical to understanding economic booms and busts.  My suggestion is to begin reading the books mentioned below as a starting point before venturing to banks’ financial statements.

Excellent Blog: http://variantperceptions.wordpress.com/

To learn more about banks you can read American Banker: http://www.americanbanker.com/ and S&P industry reports on banking. Also, the Wall Street Transcript has articles on banks and the banking industry here: http://www.twst.com/

The History of Banking: www.mises.org/books/historyofmoney.pdf

How banking Works: www.mises.org/books/mysteryofbanking.pdf

Money, Banking and Credit Cycles: www.mises.org/books/desoto.pdf

Warren Buffett plugs Jamie Dimon, The CEO of JP Morgan as a good banker and suggests reading his shareholder letters.

Jamie Dimon’s 2010 Letter to Shareholders: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/1713791083x0x458384/6832cb35-0cdb-47fe-8ae4-1183aeceb7fa/2010_JPMC_AR_letter_.pdf

2009 Letter: http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/ONE/1713793272x0x362440/1ce6e503-25c6-4b7b-8c2e-8cb1df167411/2009AR_Letter_to_shareholders.pdf

A reader, generously contributed this: http://www.scribd.com/doc/83007803/Banking-101-for-Large-Cap-Banks-May-2011

A Handbook on Analyzing Banks: http://www.amazon.com/Bank-Analysts-Handbook-Conjuring-Tricks/dp/0470091185/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top

Review of the above book:

Great introduction, some conceptual/structural flaws,October 27, 2009

By Brad Barlow (Cave City, KY) – See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)

This review is from: The Bank Analyst’s Handbook: Money, Risk and Conjuring Tricks (Hardcover)

Frost’s book gets 4 stars based on its strength and accessibility as an introduction, it’s clarity (for the most part), and the breadth of topics that he covers related to banks and the banking industry.

Unfortunately, Frost’s understanding of economics is poor, leading to a relatively shallow (but certainly textbook these days) discussion of central banking and the regulatory framework in general. He, like so many other modern writers in finance and economics, would benefit greatly from actually reading a sound economic theorist, like Henry Hazlitt or Ludwig von Mises, rather than sporadically quoting JK Galbraith and Adam Smith. This lack of understanding on his part at times undermines the conceptual framework of the book, detracting from its clarity.

A few final praises and quibbles: His use of clear examples to illustrate important points is very welcome, but there are a few cases where he could give a fuller explanation (e.g., the 20-yr mortgage example). I like the diagrams showing flows of funds and parties to common transactions, but he could have picked a better font, as the small cursive script is not always easy to read. Finally, what’s with the front cover art, seriously?

Overall, I’m quite satisfied and thankful for the book. Definitely buy it if you are in the industry.

Avoid banks and seek other ideas.

You can look here: http://www.crossingwallstreet.com/buylist

http://www.crossingwallstreet.com/my-favorite-links

The key to doing well on Wall Street is actually very simple: Buy and hold shares of outstanding companies. But too many investors never learn this valuable lesson. Or if they do learn it, they learn it the hard way. That’s where I come in. I want to help investors avoid the mistakes that separate successful investors from those who always find themselves spinning their wheels.

Without a Central Bank

A reader, Taylor, mentioned the distortions caused by central banks. What would happen if we did not have central banks?

Life without a central bank (Panama) http://mises.org/daily/2533

In this modern, post-–Bretton Woods world of “monetary order” and coordinated central-bank inflation, many who are otherwise sympathetic to the arguments against central banks believe that the elimination of central banking is an unattainable, utopian dream.

For a real-world example of how a system of market-chosen monetary policy would work in the absence of a central bank, one need not look to the past; the example exists in present-day Central America, in the Republic of Panama, a country that has lived without a central bank since its independence, with a very successful and stable macroeconomic environment.

The absence of a central bank in Panama has created a completely market-driven money supply. Panama’s market has also chosen the US dollar as its de facto currency. The country must buy or obtain their dollars by producing or exporting real goods or services; it cannot create money out of thin air. In this way, at least, the system is similar to the old gold standard. Annual inflation in the past 20 years has averaged 1% and there have been years with price deflation, as well: 1986, 1989, and 2003.

Panamanian inflation is usually between 1 and 3 points lower than US inflation; it is caused mostly by the Federal Reserve’s effect on world prices. This market-driven system has created an extremely stable macroeconomic environment. Panama is the only country in Latin America that has not experienced a financial collapse or a currency crisis since its independence.

As with most countries in the Americas, Panama’s currency in the 19th century was based on gold and silver, with a variety of silver coins and gold-based currencies in circulation. The Silver Peso was the currency of choice; however, the US greenback had also been partially in circulation, because of the isthmian railroad — the first railroad to connect the Atlantic to the Pacific — that was built by a US company in 1855. Panama originally became independent from Spain in 1826, but integrated with Colombia; however, being a small state, it was not able to immediately secede from Colombia, as Venezuela and Ecuador had done. In 1886 the Colombian government introduced several decrees forcing the acceptance of government fiat paper notes. Panama’s open economy, being based on transport and trade, plainly could not benefit from this; an 1886 editorial of its main newspaper read:

“there is no country on the globe, certainly no commercial center, in which the disastrous consequences of the introduction of an irredeemable currency would be felt as in Panama. Everything we consume here is imported. We have no products and can only send money in exchange for what is imported.”

In 1903, the country became independent, supported by the United States because of its interest in building a Canal through Panama. The citizens of the new country, in distrust of the 1886 experiment of forced fiat Colombian paper notes, decided to include article 114 in the 1904 constitution, which reads,

“There will be no forced fiat paper currency in the Republic. Thus, any individual can reject any note that he may deem untrustworthy.”

With this article, any currency in circulation would be de facto and market driven. In 1904 the Government of Panama signed a monetary agreement to allow the US dollar to become legal tender. At first, Panamanians did not accept the greenback; they viewed it with mistrust, preferring to utilize the silver peso. Gresham’s Law, however, drove the silver coins out of circulation.[1]

In 1971 the government passed a banking law that allowed for a very liberal and open banking system, without any government agency of consolidated banking supervision, and confirmed that no taxes could be exacted from interest or transactions generated in the financial system. The number of banks jumped from 23 in 1970 to 125 in 1983, most of them being international banks. The banking law promoted international lending, and because Panama has a territorial tax system, profits from loans or transactions made offshore are tax free.

This, and the presence of numerous foreign banks, allows for international integration of the system. Unlike other Latin American countries, Panama has no capital controls. Therefore, when international capital floods the system, the banks lend the excess capital offshore, avoiding the common ills, imbalances, and high inflation that other countries face when receiving huge influxes of capital.

Fiscal policy has little room to maneuver since the treasury cannot monetize its deficit. Plus, fiscal policy does not influence the money supply; if the government tries to raise the money supply during a contraction period by obtaining debt in international markets and pumping it into the system, the banks compensate and take the excess money out of circulation by sending it offshore.

Banks cannot coordinate inflation due to ample competition and the fact that (unlike even the United States banking system prior to the Federal Reserve) they do not issue bank notes. The panics and general bank runs that were so common in the US banking system in the 19th century have not occurred in Panama, and bank failures do not spread to other banks. Several banks in trouble have been bought — before any runs ensue — by larger banks, attracted by the profits that can be made from obtaining assets at a discount.

There is no deposit insurance and no lender of last resort, so banks have to act in a responsible manner. Any bad loans will be paid by the stockholders; no one will bail these banks out if they get into trouble.

After several years of accumulation of malinvestments during the booms, banks begin the necessary liquidation of bad credit. Since there is no central bank that can step in to provide cheap credit, the recession begins without any hampering by monetary policy. Banks thus create the necessary contraction by obeying market forces. Panama’s recessions commonly create deflation, which mollifies consumers and also facilitates the recovery process by reducing business costs.

Only the fact that the law does not allow for the downward flexibility of wages makes recessions longer than they would otherwise be.

Deflation happens without the terrible consequences that Keynesian economists predict; and the country, now under democratic rule, is experiencing its 4th year of market economic growth well above 7%. So the policy makers who have said that abolition of the central bank is unfeasible need only look to Panama’s macroeconomic environment, which has been favorable for over 100 years, to realize that it is, in fact, not only possible, but very beneficial. Clearly no government-forced fiat currency, no central bank, and the absence of high inflation are working quite well in this small country. Who can argue that these policies would not work in larger economies?

A Reader’s Question: How to Build a Competitive Advantage?

What To Wear For An IRS Audit

A man was called in for an audit by the IRS. So, he asked his accountant for advice on what to wear. “Wear your worst clothing and an old pair of shoes. Let them think you are a pauper,” the accountant replied.

Then he asked his lawyer the same question, but got the opposite advice:”Don’t let them intimidate you. Wear your best suit and an expensive tie.”

Confused, the man went to his Minister, told him of the conflicting advice, and asked him what he should do.

“Let me tell you a story,” replied the Minister. “A woman, about to be married, asked her mother what to wear on her wedding night. ‘Wear a heavy, long, flannel nightgown that goes right up to your neck and wool socks.’ But when she asked her best friend, she got conflicting advice: ‘ Wear your most sexy negligee, with a V neck right down to your navel.'”

The man protested: “But Reverend, what does all this have to do with my problem with the IRS?”

“It doesn’t matter what you wear; you’re going to get screwed.

A Reader’S Question: How to start a business that will develop a moat?

From Arden—his question:

Regarding “real life” businesses- a lot of time when I drive by a vacant shop, I think a lot about what kind of business I would start there, usually the results I reach seem too risky for me. What are some businesses can a guy start, that will have even the most basic moat? Is it even possible? As a businessman, I would love to know your view.

Dear Arden:

Most likely, you would need to start a low-capital-intensive service business, so your chances of creating a competitive advantage would come through either regional economies of scale or niche product economies of scale with customer captivity. The odds are against you, but you must at least operate in a focused and operationally efficient way. Also, don’t confuse an arbitrage profit with a competitive advantage like I did when I started a tariff-switching business in Brazil. Fast growth with high profits don’t indicate a competitive advantage.

I would read all about competitive advantages by reading:

Competition Demystified: http://www.amazon.com/Competition-Demystified-Radically-Simplified-Approach/dp/1591841801/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1330361257&sr=8-1

Strategic Logic: http://www.amazon.com/Strategic-Logic-J-Carlos-Jarillo/dp/1403912599/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330362742&sr=1-1

Then review this post and the video (link in the post) here: http://wp.me/p1PgpH-1N

Economics of Strategy: http://www.amazon.com/Economics-Strategy-David-Besanko/dp/0470373601/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330361290&sr=1-1

Good Strategy, Bad Strategy: http://www.amazon.com/Good-Strategy-Bad-Difference-Matters/dp/0307886239/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330362844&sr=1-5

I humbly suggest reading about the Pampered Chef by Doris Christopher. The company, The Pampered Chef, was purchased in 2004 for about $900 million by Buffett. Mrs. Christopher at the age of 35 started the company with a $3,000 loan—the only money ever put into the company! The company uses a multi-level sales organization to put on kitchen shows with proprietary cooking utensils (similar to a Tupperware Party). She built a business from scratch into a world-class organization. (Warren Buffett in the preface).

Additional readings:  

Billion dollar Lessons: http://www.amazon.com/Billion-Dollar-Lessons-Inexcusable-Business/dp/B003156BE0/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330362800&sr=1-1

Competitive Strategy (Porter): http://www.amazon.com/Competitive-Strategy-Techniques-Industries-Competitors/dp/0684841487/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330361326&sr=1-1

Co-Opetition:  http://www.amazon.com/Co-Opetition-Revolution-Combines-Competition-Cooperation/dp/0385479506/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330361407&sr=1-4

Modern Competitive Analysis: http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Competitive-Analysis-Sharon-Oster/dp/019511941X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330361426&sr=1-1

Little Book that Builds Wealth (on Moats):http://www.amazon.com/Little-Book-That-Builds-Wealth/dp/047022651X/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330361453&sr=1-1

Morningstar’s Five Rules for Successful Stock Picking: http://www.amazon.com/Five-Rules-Successful-Stock-Investing/dp/0471686174/ref=pd_sim_b_1

Essays of Warren Buffett    http://www.amazon.com/Essays-Warren-Buffett-Lessons-Corporate/dp/0966446127/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330365582&sr=1-1

Joe Mansueto of Morningstar Discusses Moats

Here is what Joe Mansueto, the founder of Morningstar, said about building a business with a moat: “When I started Morningstar in 1984, my goal was to help individuals invest in mutual funds. Back then a few financial publications carried performance data, and that was about it. By providing institutional-quality information at affordable prices, I thought we could meet a growing need.

But I also had another goal. I wanted to build a business with an “economic moat.” Warren Buffett coined this term, which refers to the sustainable advantages that protect a company against competitors—the way a moat protects a castle. I discovered Buffett in the early 1980s and studied Berkshire Hathaway’s annual reports. There Buffett explains the moat concept, and I thought I could this insight to help build a business. Economic moats made so much sense to me that the concept is the foundation for our company and for our stock analysis.

…Why spend time, money and energy only to watch competitors take away our customers?

I wanted Morningstar’s economic moat to include a trusted brand, large financial database, proprietary analytics, a sizable and knowledgeable analyst staff, and a large and loyal customer vase.

Let me know if you start a business.  You will, at least, have a head start on building an advantage.

Investing “Guru” Mark Tier’s Interview

In finance, you cannot easily prove a model right by observation. Data are scarce and, more importantly, markets are arenas of action and reaction, dialectics of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. People learn from past mistakes and go on to make new ones. What is right in one regime is wrong in the next.

In finance you play against God’s creatures, agents who value assets based on their ephemeral opinions. Can you comprehend other pretenders’ uncertainty?–Mark Bradbury

Mark Tier, An “Austrian Investment Guru”

Mark Tier on Effective Investing, Where the World Is Headed and Why Financial Literacy Helps

Sunday, February 26, 2012 – with Anthony Wile

My lessons: Austrian economics is important for understanding reality but beware of being a macro-economist. Mark Tier filed as an investor but then learned from Soros and Buffett. If he can, you can too!

 Excerpt:

Mark Tier: I’m from Australia but in 1977 I moved to Hong Kong. I’m still based there, but I spend most of my time these days in the Philippines. In a sense I’ve been a nomad all my life. My father was in the army so we rarely spent more than three years in any one place. We ended up in Canberra − that’s Australia’s equivalent of Washington − where I went to high school and university.

I studied economics and political science at the Australian National University. In my final year of economics I discovered Ludwig von Mises (thanks to Ayn Rand). In what should have been my last exam I made a fundamental mistake: I argued from Mises’ perspective against the examiners. So I had to repeat that final year to get the degree.

Then, when I got out into the real world, I found that I had to unlearn pretty much everything I’d been taught. (I also had to struggle to unlearn nonsense economics from university).

My professors were all Keynesians; reality is Misesian.

Daily Bell: Bring us up to the present and how you began to focus on investing.

Mark Tier: I’ve always wanted to be a writer. When I was 14, I’d get up early and pound an ancient typewriter for a couple of hours before going to school.

After graduating, I started writing a book that was published as Understanding Inflation (and became an Australian bestseller in 1974). I put an ad in the back for an investment newsletter − and I’ve been “unemployable” ever since. When I moved to Hong Kong I renamed it World Money Analyst. In 1991 I sold it and “retired.” That lasted about three months. I was a partner in another newsletter business for a few years. Since 2000 or thereabouts, I’ve written three books and am now working on a couple of others.

Daily Bell: What’s your track record been like?

Mark Tier: Actually, until I figured out what became The Winning Investment Habits of Warren Buffett & George Soros, lousy.

Ironically, in the World Money Analyst I advised other people what they should do with their money. My own forays into the market usually ended with burnt fingers.

Once I applied (starting in 1998) what I call the 23 “winning investment habits” to my own investing, everything changed.

For the next six years my personal stock investments went up an average of 24.4% per year − compared to the S&P’s 2.3% − without a single losing year, compared to three for the S&P. A major, major transformation.

I can’t tell you my precise track record since then as I stopped keeping track of it. Put it this way: except for a dip in 2008, my net worth has gone up or remained stable. And that’s after paying the rent, putting food on the table, putting four kids through private schools and university, and indulging in vices like latest electronic gadgets and expensive cigars.

And when I get up in the morning, I have the luxury of choosing to do whatever I want to do with my day. Mostly, I write.

Entire interview here:http://www.thedailybell.com/3644/Anthony-Wile-Mark-Tier-on

Mark Tier’s web-site and books on investing:http://marktier.com/Main/index.php

Video lecture on smoking and property rights:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=udlouHR4YcQ

Audio Interview: http://www.la.org.au/audio/221011/interview-mark-tier

Why Austrian Economics Matters-Legalize all Kinds of Currencies in the Free Market (Video)

Economists should know through common sense that new money only waters down the old money and does nothing to help the economy–similar to barbers bleeding patients to death to cure them—like medicine in the 1700s.–Anonymous

Why Austrian economics matters

This 22-minute video on inflation is probably the best video I have seen on legalizing all kinds of currencies in the free market. There are free market alternatives to gold and silver. The abolition of legal-tender laws makes sense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7Ll4HS1QW9M

High-I.Q. Investors

The New York Times Article by Robert Schiller makes a case that high-I.Q. tend to focus on their own smaller cap stocks with value characteristics.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/business/what-high-iq-investors-do-differently-economic-view.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=robert%20schiller%20iq&st=cse

February 25, 2012

What High-I.Q. Investors Do Differently by ROBERT J. SHILLER

YOU don’t have to be a genius to pick good investments. But does having a high I.Q. score help?

The answer, according to a paper published in the December issue of The Journal of Finance, is a qualified yes.

The study is certainly provocative. Even after taking into account factors like income and education, the authors concluded that people with relatively high I.Q.’s typically diversify their investment portfolios more than those with lower scores and invest more heavily in the stock market. They also tend to favor small-capitalization stocks, which have historically beaten the broader market, as well as companies with high book values relative to their share prices.

The results are that people with high I.Q.’s build portfolios with better risk-return profiles than their lower-scoring peers.

Certainly, caution is needed here. I.Q. tests are controversial as to what they measure, and factors like income, quality of education, and family background may not be completely controlled for. But the study’s results are worth pondering for their possible implications.

The paper, by Mark Grinblatt of the University of California, Los Angeles, Matti Keloharju of Aalto University in Helsinki and Juhani Linnainmaa of the University of Chicago took advantage of some unusual data. The crucial numbers came from, of all places, Finland.

Why there? Two reasons. First, Finland requires all able young men to perform military service. As a result, the authors were able to obtain I.Q. test scores of all of men conscripted in Finland from 1982 to 2001.

Second, Finland had a wealth tax, and its citizens had to report their investment portfolios to the government. This means the authors could compare the men’s I.Q. scores and their investing habits, as well as link those factors to other individual data. Similar data sets aren’t available in other countries, however, so we may not want to generalize too much.

Still, the results are interesting. The authors didn’t claim that people with high scores had some kind of monopoly on stock-picking genius. What they did contend was that these people tended to follow basic rules of successful investing.

In some ways, it’s a puzzle why I.Q. scores would matter in this regard. After all, the view that people should diversify their investments, to avoid putting all their eggs in one basket, is widely accepted. It’s not hard to diversify a portfolio or to have someone do it for you.

And another time-proven rule of investing — that people should put a substantial amount of their money in the stock market — might have its detractors, no matter what their I.Q. scores. That is especially possible given the volatility in the financial markets in recent years.

Yet only about half of all American adults have money in the stock market, directly or indirectly. So maybe something else is going on. If people can’t figure out the financial markets on their own, they can entrust their money to professionals or heed professional advice. The real problem may not be that many people lack investing savvy or smarts. Perhaps what they lack is trust, or confidence in whom to trust.

Three economists, Luigi Guiso of the Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance, Paola Sapienza of Northwestern and Luigi Zingales of the University of Chicago, argued in a paper published in 2008 that many households avoid investing directly in stocks out of vague fears that they might be deliberately misled or cheated. Using results from a survey of households, this time in the Netherlands, the economists showed that those who indicated a high level of trust were 50 percent more likely to invest in the stock market. They were also more likely to have diversified their stock holdings. The paper, titled “Trusting the Stock Market,” was published in The Journal of Finance.

Knowing whom to trust, and relying on those who are trustworthy, is itself an aspect of intelligence. Mr. Guiso and his co-authors cited research that suggested that investment decisions relied significantly on a part of the brain called the Brodmann area 10. This region of the frontal cortex is believed to be associated with our ability to make inferences about others’ preferences and beliefs based on their actions. Such social intelligence seems to reward some people more than others with an ability to put standard investment advice into practice.

Successful investing requires that we judge other people, and it relies on an ability to develop a good model of others’ minds. It requires that we put into perspective recent angry rhetoric against Wall Street and understand that, while some criticisms are surely justified, others are just as surely exaggerated.

Anyone, regardless of background or education, may worry about being misled. The professionals tell us that the stock market is the best place to invest, but such assurances don’t help us when the market swoons. Many pros assured us that housing prices would never decline, either.

But if we can somehow foster more trust in investment professionals, a full spectrum of people — whatever their I.Q.’s — might adopt a more successful approach toward investing.

THE Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, created by the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 and now under the command of Richard Cordray, ought to be an important vehicle to help bring about such trust, by responding to complaints and making rules that will help restore confidence. The Office of Financial Education, one of its divisions, would seem to have a big role in this effort.

But there is only so much this agency can do. It has a budget amounting to less than $2 for every American adult in 2012, and much of that will go toward activities it is taking over from the Office of Thrift Supervision and other agencies.

The government, as well as those in financial and educational spheres, must think about how we can restore and strengthen ordinary people’s trust in the financial markets. It doesn’t take a high I.Q. to see that it’s in everyone’s interest to get basic financial decisions right.

Robert J. Shiller is professor of economics and finance at Yale.

Reader’s Questions: ROIC

Return on Invested Capital: ROIC

A reader asked about calculating ROIC:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/82818728/ROIC

There is no perfect way to determine ROIC.

1.  Do you use net PPE or Gross PPE?

2.  What happens when you ignore goodwill in your calculation?

3.  How do you calculate excess cash?

4.  Do you adjust the way you calculate ROIC depending upon the type of industry?

5.  What is more important a 100% ROIC vs. a 200% ROIC or being able to redeploy that capital at high rates?

I will write-up my response but read the PDF from Bear Stearns on ROIC to think about the subject.

Economics: Synopsis of Euro Crisis; Growth in US Money and Banking Reserves…Interesting Reading

The most expressive market is the one the one that the Fed isn’t overtly manipulating. Though Treasury yields might as well be frozen, the gold price is soaring. Why has it taken flight–not on account of an inflation problem. Gold is appreciating in terms of all paper currencies–or, alternatively paper currencies are depreciating in terms of gold–because the world is losing faith in the tenets of modern central banking. …..Gold is hard to find and costly to produce. You can materialize dollars with the tap of a computer key.–James Grant (Wall Street Journal, Dec. 5, 2009)

Monetary Policy seems extremely accommodating

Check here for the latest Federal Reserve monetary statistics: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h3/current/

Fed reserves are rising across the board, excess reserves, required reserves, non-borrowed reserves, total reserves and the monetary base are increasing. Last month required reserves are up 5%–an annualized rate of 60%.

Watch what Mr. Bernanke does. This data indicates that the rising prices in the commodities market and in the U.S. stock market are going to continue. The manipulated (nominal prices) economy will be strong as well.

The developing price-inflation is going to surprise everyone traditional economists and Wall Street pundits but not YOU. www.economicpolicyjournal.com

The EURO CRISIS

A good synopsis of the cause and effects of the Euro Crisis.

http://mises.org/daily/5914/The-Future-of-the-Euro

The problems of the eurozone are ultimately malinvestments. In Greece these days the struggle continues about who will ultimately foot the bill for these investments. During the early 2000s an expansionary monetary policy lowered interest rates artificially. Entrepreneurs financed investment projects that only looked profitable due to the low interest rates but were not sustained by real savings. Housing bubbles and consumption booms developed in the periphery.

In 2007 the bubbles began to burst. Housing prices started to stagnate and even to fall. Homeowners and builders started to default on their loans. As banks had financed and invested into these malinvestments, they suffered losses. After the collapse of the investment bank Lehman Brothers interbank lending collapsed and governments intervened. They bailed out banks and, thereby, assumed the losses of the banking system resulting from the malinvestments.

As malinvestments were socialized, public debts soared in the eurozone. Furthermore, tax revenues collapsed due to the crisis. At the same time, governments started to subsidize industrial sectors and unemployment.

Moreover, even before the crisis, governments had accumulated malinvestments due to their excessive welfare spending. Two causes had incentivized social spending in the periphery. The first cause is low interest rates. These low interest rates were caused by an expansionary monetary policy by the European Central Bank (ECB) and the single currency in itself. The euro came with an implicit bailout guarantee. Market participants expected stronger governments to bail out weaker ones in order to save the political project of the euro if worse came to worst. The interest rates that the Italian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Greek governments had to pay came down drastically when these countries were admitted into the euro. The low interest rates gave these countries leeway for deficit spending.

The second cause is that the euro is a tragedy of the commons, as I explain in my (Philipp Bagus) book The Tragedy of the Euro.

Of Interest

A fair bet? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhXJcfczNIc

Jeremy Grantham pontificates: http://www.gmo.com/websitecontent/JGLetter_LongestLetterEver_4Q11.pdf

Postscript: I will work on answering readers’ questions this weekend. Thanks for your infinite patience.

Chapter 8 in Competition Demystified: Games Companies Play–Questions

The Prisoner’s Dilemma is a short parable about two prisoners who are individually offered a chance to rat on each other for which the “ratter” would receive a lighter sentence and the “rattee” would receive a harsher sentence. The problem results from the fact that both can play this game — that is, defect — and if both do, then both do worse than they would had they both kept silent. This peculiar parable serves as a model of cooperation between two or more individuals (or corporations or countries) in ordinary life in that in many cases each individual would be personally better off not cooperating (defecting) on the other.

Chapter 8:  A Structured Approach to Competitive Strategy, Part 1: The Prisoner’s Dilemma Game

This chapter has no HBR Case Study but it is important to understand. A great supplement to this chapter and to understanding Game Theory is the book, The Art of Strategy (A Game Theorist’s Guide to Success in Business and Life) by Avinash K. Dixit and Barry J. Nalebuff, the authors of Thinking Strategically.

Questions

  1. Describe in a few sentences the dynamics of a prisoner’s dilemma game with two competitors of a similar size and the likely equilibrium in the real world of Lowes and Home Depot.
  2. When a competitor wants to be “deviant,” how can others in the market control the deviant’s behavior?

I will post the discussion next week.

Chapter 7: Production Advantages Lost, Part 3

All products become toasters in the end

Part 2: http://wp.me/p1PgpH-tC

Part 3: Explain the statement, “No matter how complex and unique products seem at the start, in the long run they are all toasters.”

Though they differ from one to another in functional and design features, one toaster is pretty much like another. But with no barriers to entry here, it is unreasonable to assume that any manufacturer is earning an exceptional return on its toaster assets.

How different is a complicated and expensive piece of network equipment—a router, smart hub, or Lan switch—from a toaster? Initially very different, but ultimately, not so different at all. The success of Cisco in its original business attracted new entrants, most of whom could not put a dent in Cisco’s performance without extensive technical and maintenance support. They were not sophisticated enough to mix and match communication equipment the way families do with household appliances.  Also, the need to develop successive new generations of software and hardware makes fixed costs a permanently large part of total costs, and they are a source of economies of scale. (In contrast, in CD manufacturing, plant, and equipment were a once-and-for-all expense. Economies of scale topped at a two million discs per year plant.) All these factors created competitive advantages for Cisco, and put up barriers to entry in its enterprise-class business.

But it seems clear that those advantages diminish over time. Equipment becomes more reliable and easier to use. Support and service costs decline. Compatibility across company product lines increases as equipment functions become standardized. Research and development costs decline as product lines mature. Customers become more confident in their use of equipment and more willing to try new, lower cost suppliers. Some of these changes have already affected Cisco. The trends identified above will ultimately eliminate Cisco’s competitive advantages entirely.

Technological change can be the enemy of the investor.

Our next study will be Chapter 8 in Competition Demystified.

Housekeeping

Housekeeping: Answering Readers’ Questions

Upon completion of finishing Part 3 of our case study on Cisco and Philips–Chapter 7 in Competition Demystified, I will try to answer several questions from readers.

  1. What is the definition of inflation?
  2. How to calculate ROIC?
  3. How to develop a competitive advantage?

Thanks for your patience.