Wednesday 16 October 2019

A Brexit Bounce Triggers Hopium.


Baltic Dry Index. 1898 -18 Brent Crude 58.91 Spot Gold 1484

Never ending Brexit now October 31, maybe. 15 days away.
Trump’s Nuclear China Tariffs Now In Effect.
The USA v EU trade war starts October 18. Just 2 days away.

“But land is land, and it's safer than the stocks and bonds of Wall Street swindlers.”

Eugene O'Neill, Long Day's Journey into Night

A near Brexit exit “agreement,” seems to have been the trigger for widespread optimism to return to global stocks.

Somehow, magically, a Brexit agreement, no one to know what it is, is going to turn around the global manufacturing recession, sort out the USA v China trade and technology wars, sort out all the American and European political melodramas, sort out Europe’s bankrupt banks, and usher in a prosperous and profitable future for WeWork and all of its precarious, nervous, landlords. And they all lived happily ever after.

Call me old fashioned, but I’m sceptical. The Fed is busy monetising again and that’s always a sign of systemic trouble in the financial system. As Reuters reports below, there isn’t even a consensus in the Fed as to what’s actually happening in the global and US economy right now.

Last Friday’s “USA v China trade agreement part one,” now seems to be more of a Trumpian mirage than real, as does China’s “pledge” to buy up 50 billion of US farm products.

Our markets have entered Fairy Tale Land. A parallel universe far from the harsh reality of life for most on planet earth. A perfect time to be exiting over priced stocks near the top.

Asian shares tick up, sterling off five-month peak as crunch Brexit talks eyed

October 16, 2019 / 1:55 AM
SYDNEY/TOKYO (Reuters) - Asian shares inched higher while sterling came off five-month highs in volatile trade on Wednesday as investors looked to whether Britain can secure a deal to avoid a disorderly exit from the European Union.

Officials and diplomats involved in negotiations over the acrimonious divorce between the world’s fifth-largest economy and its biggest trading bloc said that differences over the terms of the split had narrowed significantly. 

The news lit a fire under European and U.S. equities, which jumped about 1% on Tuesday. The British pound GBP=D3 rocketed to $1.28, a level not seen since May 21.

The pound has strengthened nearly 5% over the past week as investors rushed to reprice the prospect of a last-minute Brexit deal before the end-October deadline.

Still, the pound lost steam in Asia, falling 0.3% to $1.2752, as uncertainties remained on whether a deal will be sealed at a make-or-break EU summit on Thursday and Friday and if Britain’s minority government can get it through a divided UK parliament.

MSCI's broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan rose 0.4% while Japan's Nikkei .N225 jumped 1.5%, hitting 10-month highs.

Australian shares added 0.9% while South Korea's KOSPI index .KS11 climbed 0.6%, maintaining gains after South Korea's central bank cut its policy interest rate for the second time in three months, matching a record low to address mounting deflationary pressures.

Stronger-than-expected earnings from major U.S. banks JPMorgan (JPM.N), Citigroup (C.N) and Wells Fargo (WFC.N) also boosted equities even as the International Monetary Fund downgraded its 2019 global growth forecast for a fifth time.
More

U.S.-China tariffs drag global growth to lowest in a decade: IMF

October 15, 2019 / 2:15 PM
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S.-China trade war will cut 2019 global growth to its slowest pace since the 2008-2009 financial crisis, the International Monetary Fund warned on Tuesday, but said output would rebound if their dueling tariffs were removed.

The IMF said its latest World Economic Outlook projections here show 2019 GDP growth at 3.0%, down from 3.2% in a July forecast, largely due to increasing fallout from global trade friction.

The forecasts set a gloomy backdrop for the IMF and World Bank annual meetings this week in Washington, the first for the Fund’s new managing director, Kristalina Georgieva. She is inheriting a range of problems, from stagnating trade to unrest in Ecuador and political backlash in Argentina over IMF-mandated austerity programs.

Without a nearly simultaneous easing of monetary policy by major central banks, IMF chief economist Gita Gopinath said global growth would be half a percentage point lower in 2019 — at 2.5%, teetering on the edge of widespread recession.

“The weakness in growth is driven by a sharp deterioration in manufacturing activity and global trade, with higher tariffs and prolonged trade policy uncertainty damaging investment and demand for capital goods,” Gopinath said.

The global crisis lender said that by 2020, announced tariffs would reduce global economic output by 0.8%. That translates to a loss of about $700 billion — the equivalent of making Switzerland’s economy disappear.

The growth downgrade assumes that all announced U.S. tariffs on Chinese goods are put in place, along with Chinese retaliation. These include a 5 percentage point U.S. duty increase on Chinese goods originally scheduled for Tuesday and 10% tariffs on $156 billion in Chinese goods scheduled for Dec. 15.
More

Uncertainty seen persisting, along with Fed's divide

October 16, 2019 / 12:33 AM
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - With two weeks to go until their next policy meeting, U.S. central bankers appear unconvinced a partial U.S.-China trade deal is enough to dispel the policy uncertainty that has weighed on economic growth for months.

And yet, with unemployment at decades-long lows and consumer spending strong, Federal Reserve policymakers remain far from united behind cutting borrowing costs any further than they already have. 

“Right now, I see the economy in a good place, and policy accommodation in a good place,” San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly told reporters after a speech a the Los Angeles World Affairs Council & Town Hall.

Businesses retain an overarching sense of uncertainty, she said, even though “the gusting (of headwinds) seems to have gone down a little bit on the news of some progress on Brexit, some progress on trade negotiations between the U.S. and China,” she said.

Weak inflation, including fresh data on Tuesday showing the three-year inflation outlook among U.S. consumers falling to its lowest level on record, has her attention, she said.

---- “In terms of what to do going forward, I would like to see additional data, because the economy is in a really good place right now,” Daly said.

Speaking in London earlier in the day, St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank President James Bullard painted a gloomier picture.

Like Daly, he sees what he called continued “trade regime uncertainty” as a key risk to the U.S. economy.

But other risks remain high as well, including continued weak inflation and slowing global growth.

And unlike Daly, who said she sees policy as currently “slightly accommodative”, Bullard said in his view it may be “too restrictive”.

As a result, the Fed “may choose to provide additional accommodation going forward, but decisions will be made on a meeting-by-meeting basis,” he said in remarks to a conference in London on Tuesday.

Neither Daly nor Bullard speak for the Fed’s policy setting panel as a whole, made up as it is of 17 different people with sometimes sharply different views.

But they do represent two broad groups within the central bank: those who like Fed Chair Jerome Powell believe the outlook is generally positive, and those who believe the U.S. economy needs even easier policy to avoid sinking into a recession.

A third group believes the Fed has already gone a bit too far in lowering rates, and fears too-easy policy could lead to financial instability if investors take on too much risk and asset values get stretched.
More

China Threatens to Retaliate If U.S. Enacts Hong Kong Bill

By Iain Marlow, Daniel Flatley, and Dandan Li
Updated on October 16, 2019, 5:00 AM GMT+1
China threatened unspecified “strong countermeasures” if the U.S. Congress enacts legislation supporting Hong Kong protesters, in a sign of the deepening strain between the world’s two largest economies as they attempt to seal a trade deal.

China’s foreign ministry issued the warning Wednesday after the U.S. House passed a package of measures backing a pro-democracy movement that has rocked the former British colony for more than four months. Among them was the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act, which subjects the city’s special U.S. trading status to annual reviews and provides for sanctions against officials deemed responsible for undermining its “fundamental freedoms and autonomy.”

While the legislation must also pass the U.S. Senate and be signed by President Donald Trump to become law, it already has strong bipartisan support in the Republican-run upper chamber. The Hong Kong measures was passed by the Democrat-controlled House by unanimous voice votes Tuesday.

Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Geng Shuang warned American lawmakers to stop meddling in China’s internal affairs “before falling off the edge of the cliff,” without specifying how it would retaliate.
More

Finally, is the Fairy Tale world of valuations from SoftBank Group and Silly Con Valley about to implode? My guess as an old dinosaur, watching markets since 1968, is that it is.

The Millennial Urban Lifestyle Is About to Get More Expensive

As WeWork crashes and Uber bleeds cash, the consumer-tech gold rush may be coming to an end.
6:00 AM ET
Several weeks ago, I met up with a friend in New York who suggested we grab a bite at a Scottish bar in the West Village. He had booked the table through something called Seated, a restaurant app that pays users who make reservations on the platform. We ordered two cocktails each, along with some food. And in exchange for the hard labor of drinking whiskey, the app awarded us $30 in credits redeemable at a variety of retailers.

I am never offended by freebies. But this arrangement seemed almost obscenely generous. To throw cash at people every time they walk into a restaurant does not sound like a business. It sounds like a plot to lose money as fast as possible—or to provide New Yorkers, who are constantly dining out, with a kind of minimum basic income.

“How does this thing make any sense?” I asked my friend.

“I don’t know if it makes sense, and I don’t know how long it’s going to last,” he said, pausing to scroll through redemption options. “So, do you want your half in Amazon credits or Starbucks?”

----Starting about a decade ago, a fleet of well-known start-ups promised to change the way we work, work out, eat, shop, cook, commute, and sleep. These lifestyle-adjustment companies were so influential that wannabe entrepreneurs saw them as a template, flooding Silicon Valley with “Uber for X” pitches.

But as their promises soared, their profits didn’t. It’s easy to spend all day riding unicorns whose most magical property is their ability to combine high valuations with persistently negative earnings—something I’ve pointed out before. If you wake up on a Casper mattress, work out with a Peloton before breakfast, Uber to your desk at a WeWork, order DoorDash for lunch, take a Lyft home, and get dinner through Postmates, you’ve interacted with seven companies that will collectively lose nearly $14 billion this year. If you use Lime scooters to bop around the city, download Wag to walk your dog, and sign up for Blue Apron to make a meal, that’s three more brands that have never earned a dime or have seen their valuations fall by more than 50 percent.

These companies don’t give away cold hard cash as blatantly as Seated. But they’re not so different from the restaurant app. To maximize customer growth they have strategically—or at least “strategically”—throttled their prices, in effect providing a massive consumer subsidy. You might call it the Millennial Lifestyle Sponsorship, in which consumer tech companies, along with their venture-capital backers, help fund the daily habits of their disproportionately young and urban user base. With each Uber ride, WeWork membership, and hand-delivered dinner, the typical consumer has been getting a sweetheart deal.

For consumers—if not for many beleaguered contract workers—the MLS is a magnificent deal, a capital-to-labor transfer of wealth in pursuit of long-term profit; the sort of thing that might simultaneously please Bernie Sanders and the ghost of Milton Friedman.

But this was never going to last forever. WeWork’s disastrous IPO attempt has triggered reverberations across the industry. The theme of consumer tech has shifted from magic to margins. Venture capitalists and start-up founders alike have re-embraced an old mantra: Profits matter.
More

“I will tell you the secret to getting rich on Wall Street. You try to be greedy when others are fearful. And you try to be fearful when others are greedy.”

Warren Buffett

Crooks and Scoundrels Corner.

The bent, the seriously bent, and the totally doubled over.

Today, WeWork again. What were they smoking when someone wrote the WeWork IPO? Note, though the article doesn’t spell it out, the “G&A” expenses referred to, is probably general and administrative expenses.

Despite all the bad press, WeWork is still frenetically pressing on regardless. In for a penny, in for a Pound, perhaps?

WeWork—The IPO That Shouldn’t?

18 Sep 2019|by Nori Gerardo Lietz

No IPO in recent memory has received as much negative pre-public publicity as WeWork, which provides shared workspaces and services for startups and other enterprises. The outpouring of criticism has focused on a number of items including a record of past and probable continuing losses, its original proposed stratospheric valuation, its byzantine corporate structure, its woeful (or nonexistent) corporate governance, and most of all its flamboyant founder, Adam Neumann.

So perhaps it was not a surprise when WeWork, given the continuing criticism, announced recently it would delay the IPO for at least for a few months.

---- To ameliorate some of the criticism, and to salvage its IPO, WeWork recently pivoted. It proposed its IPO valuation of $47 billion be slashed, added a woman to its board of directors, and, this past week, indicated it would modify its corporate governance structure. Whether these actions will be sufficient remains to be seen. WeWork clearly is not advancing its case from a position of strength.

What is the difference and is it warranted?

A dive into the numbers

Are the reasons cited above the reason to cause WeWork’s IPO to collapse? No. The reason for pulling support should be based on the numbers in its prospectus, not on emotional reactions to Adam Neumann. There has been a paucity of this analysis.

With co-author Sean Bracken, I’ve analyzed the company, minus the surrounding drama, by focusing on the financials and other operational details published in the company’s prospectus. The lessons to be found there are classic examples (and warnings to other IPO companies) of how not to frame a public offering. WeWork took advantage of being deemed an “emerging company” under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012. The JOBS Act permits these companies to apply differing, i.e., lower, standards in terms of disclosure in an IPO. In my opinion, WeWork should be pilloried for exploiting these standards.

There are numerous examples provided in our analysis, entitled Why WeWork Won’t (pdf), but some of the major examples of how they could have made a better case for the company by not obfuscating their financials are highlighted below.

In short, WeWork took advantage of the JOBS Act to present their financials in such a way that, in aggregate, could be considered misleading. In general, they presented the most favorable outcomes, without providing counterbalancing offsets to revenues and expenses.

For example, WeWork never presented a GAAP-compliant EBIDTA line anywhere in the prospectus, which is a very basic metric. Instead, they proposed a new metric, “contribution margin”, as the basis of how to analyze their unit economics. This metric incorporates the benefit of free rent and other concessions they receive from landlords on the front-end without disclosing the future costs the company will incur when these concessions burn off.

Among several items detailed in my analysis, WeWork failed to include major expenses in their current operations that could materially impact their contribution margin, such as the failure to record any reserves for their furniture, fixtures, and equipment that are very real current costs. They fail to allocate any of their corporate G&A to their open, operating facilities. GAAP would require them to allocate all of it in an EBIDTA calculation. If these items are included, WeWork’s contribution margin becomes substantially negative. Ultimately, the metric WeWork proposes to use is of marginal utility in analyzing the company’s results.

Missing information

The prospectus fails to give guidance to potential investors in other areas. WeWork fails to discuss the impact of the free rent and other concessions it has to give to its enterprise tenants as an offset to the concessions they have received from landlords. Further, there is no discussion of the potential impact of the revenue sharing arrangements WeWork provides landlords in exchange for the latter’s willingness to provide the capital for the buildout and tenant improvements at their facilities. Both factors will have an impact on their top line revenues. WeWork also fails to address how they will get their G&A growth under control to some reasonable level. G&A is growing at a rate that exceeds their topline revenue growth.
More

WeWork opens new sites at breakneck speed despite cash-burn concerns

October 14, 2019 / 6:02 AM
NEW YORK (Reuters) - WeWork has opened almost as many new locations in the last 3-1/2 months as it did in the whole first half of this year, likely accelerating the speed with which the office-sharing company is burning through cash as increasingly hard-nosed investors scrutinize its prospects for going public.

According to a Reuters analysis of information on the company’s website, WeWork had 622 sites open in 123 cities on Oct. 10. That compares with its footprint of 528 locations in 111 cities on June 30 that was outlined in the prospectus for its abandoned IPO.

The website also identifies 89 sites as “coming soon” and 117 sites as “just announced” - all new locations that are yet to open.

Altogether, WeWork says on the website that it will soon have 845 locations in 125 cities, but it is unclear whether all those will still open. A WeWork spokesman declined to comment on its plans.

The quickening pace of new office openings adds to the risks for WeWork, a company that has created a global brand for its shared workspace concept but was forced to halt plans to go public on Sept. 30 because of investor concerns about how it was valued and whether its business model is sustainable.
More

“Many a time in the past, when an active operator on Wall Street, he had done things...which would have caused raised eyebrows on the fo'c'sle of a pirate sloop - and done them without a blush.”

P G Wodehouse

Technology Update.
With events happening fast in the development of solar power and graphene, I’ve added this section. Updates as they get reported. Is converting sunlight to usable cheap AC or DC energy mankind’s future from the 21st century onwards?

Gresham House seals battery optimisation deal with KiWi Power

Published: 14 Oct 2019, 11:58
Gresham House New Energy has signed a contract with KiWi Power for the optimisation of its 15MW Lockleaze battery in Bristol.

The battery is set to go live this month and will be the latest addition to KiWi’s storage portfolio, which is set to hit 80MW by the end of this year.

Engie-backed KiWi’s proprietary technology platform will automatically dispatch the battery in real-time, following a strategy designed to maximise its value and lifespan by continuously evaluating the degradation cost of each market action, the aggregator said.

The battery will be optimised against multiple revenue streams, including ancillary services, and participate in the Balancing Mechanism. Thomas Jennings, head of optimisation at KiWi Power, said the aggregator will "maximise" the returns of the battery, increasing its performance and hunt value.

Ben Guest, managing director of Gresham House New Energy, said KiWi’s five years of experience gives the firm “confidence they are a strong partner” to deliver long-term value.

“Energy storage technology is vital to maximising the potential of renewable energy and offers an attractive new asset class for investors wanting to support the UK’s transition to a cleaner, more sustainable future.”

Gresham also signed a deal with EDF Energy last month for the optimisation of a 20MW storage project through its PowerShift platform. EDF is also optimising Anesco’s Clayhill battery through the demand side response platform.

But from Monday’s LIR, some caution is needed by the early uptakers of battery technology.

The Arizona Battery Explosion Is Changing Conventional Wisdom on Safety

Six months later, GTM gets an exclusive update from APS and Fluence on an event that’s forcing a new look at grid battery engineering.
Julian Spector

It's been nearly six months since an explosion ripped through a grid battery near Phoenix and upended the industry's understanding of the technology's safety.

The McMicken conflagration injured first responders and marred the
safety record of the U.S. energy storage industry. The ability to store wind and solar electricity is crucial to the continued growth of clean energy, but the fire showed the risks of battery storage, even when handled by highly experienced professionals.
More

“It was the job of people like me to make up reasons, to spin a plausible yarn. And it’s amazing what people will believe. Heavy selling out of the Middle East was an old standby. Since no one ever had any clue what the Arabs were doing with their money or why, no story involving Arabs could ever be refuted. So if you didn’t know why the dollar was falling, you shouted out something about Arabs.”

Michael Lewis, Liar's Poker

The monthly Coppock Indicators finished September

DJIA: 26,917 +57 Up. NASDAQ: 7,999 +62 Up. SP500: 2,977 +61 Up.

Another inconclusive month, but all three moved up weakly.   I would not rely on nor take such a weak buy signal.

No comments:

Post a Comment