The enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it’s the illusion of knowledge (Stephen Hawking)

It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so (Mark Twain)

Invest with smart knowledge and objective odds

BEARNOBULL’S WEEKENDER

StreetAccount Summary – U.S. market recap: Dow +0.19%, S&P 500 +0.24%, Nasdaq +0.57%, Russell 2000 +0.68%
Online mortgages and the weekly roundup in tech and retail by Leah Grace
Apple Watch and the continuing cult of Mac/iOS by Leah Grace
Barry Ritholtz’ Masters in Business Bloomberg radio show with Charley Ellis, Chair of Yale Endowment, and author of Winning the Loser’s Game: Timeless Strategies for Successful Investing.
The Complete Bull Vs. Bear Debate on Whether Biotech Is in a Bubble

Not really my definition of “complete” but interesting.

Punch Period of adjustments – Watch out for the growing list of ‘exceptional’ items in company results

(…) By their nature, these issues will rarely be black or white and with restructuring – a particular favourite with the adjusters – the greyness relates to how much something is truly an exceptional item rather than a continual cost of doing business. Some costs associated with closing a business, say, could well be a true one-off but, if a business needs to ‘restructure’ every year to keep up with the latest trends, it probably is not. 

Speaking of trends, something we are seeing more and more in the retail sector is businesses looking to make an adjustment for the cost of refitting stores and then flagging that as ‘exceptional’. Again, it can be a matter of degree but surely one must at least ask the question as to how much keeping your stores looking nice so customers actually want to visit actually counts as an exceptional, and how much it is just a basic cost of retailing. 

Another adjustment classic relates to acquisition costs. If a company is regularly buying other businesses, should the legal, investment banking and other costs being incurred every year in relation to that really count as exceptional? That is before we start to consider whether the reason a company is having to make regular acquisitions is to compensate for underinvestment in R&D or marketing.  

In a similar vein, the same question may be asked about costs incurred by companies that regularly have to defend themselves against legal actions. For a number of multi-nationals – banks, pharmaceuticals and tobacco companies would be obvious examples – fighting lawsuits, dealing with regulators and so forth is not so much exceptional as a cost of staying in business. You might take a different view on the explicit large fines such companies can face but even negotiating their size is arguably part of the decisions those businesses make every day. 

Then, since we mention the pharmaceutical sector, there are research and development costs – and indeed explorations costs for, say, oil and mining businesses. It is a well-established accounting practice that, if these costs are expected to have a high probability of leading to revenues or similar in the future, they can be capitalised as an asset on a company’s balance sheet rather than charged against profits on day one. 

This is open to a fair amount of management discretion as it is, but the real distortion comes if it later transpires these costs will not yield any benefit, which results in the asset having to be written off. These write-offs tend to be treated by companies as exceptional items yet, if you are an oil producer or a pharmaceutical company, say, respectively digging for oil and investing in research and ending up with nothing to show for it is not so much exceptional as a fact of business life. In this way the inevitable costs of failed endeavours all businesses have can be hidden both as they are being incurred and when they are written off. 

There are other examples of these rather unexceptional exceptionals – stripping out the costs of running a company pension scheme, stripping out the costs of giving employees shares as part of their remuneration package and so on – but you get the idea. The bottom line, if you will excuse the pun, is there is a growing list of reasons for investors to be wary of how companies are stating their profits. 

In order to build up a real sense of what a company’s profits and cash generation actually are – and that, after all, is how you appraise the value of a potential investment – investors need to roll up their sleeves, dig into the numbers and come to their own view on whether certain costs really are as exceptional as some companies would appear to believe. Blindly accepting a company’s view of what its real profits are is an increasingly perilous thing to do.

Alien I am not a big fan of these “read me-hear me-see me” apps (really no time for much of that!) but they are fascinating nonetheless. Here’s the latest one:

Meet Periscope, Twitter’s New Live Video App

NEW$ & VIEW$ (27 MAR. 2015): Nominal sales vs labor costs; Japan; Oil.

More Signs of Wage Inflation

Via The Big Picture

From Torsten Sløk of Deutsche Bank:

The first chart below shows that over the past year employer costs have risen significantly. The second chart shows that the rise is driven partly by a significant increase in bonuses. The third chart shows that the uptrend in wages can been seen across all parts of the services sector. And the fourth chart shows that wages are rising faster for unionized workers. This data, the Employer Costs for Employee Compensation (ECEC), is created using the same raw data that goes into the Employment Cost Index (ECI). The difference between the ECI and the ECEC is that the ECI controls for changes in the industrial-occupational composition of jobs. In other words, the ECI is intended to indicate how the average compensation paid by employers would have changed over time if the industrial-occupational composition of employment had not changed from the base period. The ECEC data on the other hand, does not control for the effect of a change in the composition of jobs. For example, if a company goes from hiring fewer customer services workers to hiring more R&D workers then it would show up in the ECEC data as higher wage inflation (because R&D workers generally have higher wages than customer services workers).

This happens to be consistent with the data showing that employment growth has been stronger for high-wage occupations and it is also consistent with the recent strong uptrend seen in private sector R&D spending. In the 1990s we saw the opposite, with the ECI above the ECEC because more lower paying jobs were created. For more discussion of this and the differences between the ECI and the ECEC see also this BLS article here:http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/cwc/explaining-the-differential-growth-rates-of-the-eci-and-ecec.pdf. The bottom line remains that there are several ways of measuring wage inflation and although average hourly earnings remains flat, several of the other measures of wages are showing signs of broad-based wage pressure.wage inflation3

A slower economy, slower overall inflation with deflating retail prices, and a rising dollar against rising labour costs means lower margins and potentially lower earnings. Here’s another illustration from Moody’s:

image

BTW this a.m.: Q4 Corporate Profits: -1.4% vs. +5.06% prior.

EMU Trends Turn Up for Credit and Money

The EMU is showing a clear pick up in credit and money growth trends as of February 2015. It is beginning to look as though the ECB’s special efforts to stimulate credit growth are starting to pay off. The QE effort is too recent to have its direct effect included in the data, but QE has been expected and other programs appear to be having some impact too.

Japan’s Zero Inflation Is a Setback for Abenomics Japan drifts back toward deflation, two years after launching a radical monetary policy experiment to cure the affliction.

imageThe government said Friday the core consumer-price index hit 0%, the lowest level since May 2013 and far from the 2% target that the central bank had pledged to hit by this spring. The index excludes fresh food prices and effects of a tax increase. (…)

To be sure, the economy has some bright spots, according to other data released Friday. As a shrinking working-age population and growth in construction work—in part fed by fiscal stimulus—tighten the labor market, the jobless rate fell to 3.5% in February from 3.6% in January, while the jobs-to-applicants ratio rose to 1.15, its highest level since March 1992. That means there were 115 jobs available for every 100 job seekers.

That, however, hasn’t translated into more spending by consumers. Household spending fell 2.9% from a year earlier in February, marking the 13th consecutive decline. Retail sales fell 1.8% from a year earlier. (…)

Despite the weak yen, exports have been slow to rise, in part because many Japanese companies have opted not to use the new currency advantage to cut prices on world markets, but rather maintain sales at current levels and book higher yen profits. And despite sharp earnings gains, multinationals have continued to sit on cash, rather than invest it in new equipment, as they remain unsure of Japan’s longer-term growth prospects. (…)

In the FT:

The advance inflation reading for the Tokyo area in March stayed positive at 0.2 per cent year-on-year, suggesting Japan will not dip into deflation next month, but it could still happen by summer.

“Electricity and gas charges are expected to start declining from April onwards, putting larger downward pressures on the core CPI inflation rate going forward,” noted analysts at Credit Suisse in Tokyo.

Elsewhere in the WSJ:

(…) The worries are overdone. The Bank of Japan has clearly missed its target, declared at the start of its easing campaign two years ago, to hit 2% inflation in two years. But this is due to factors largely beyond its control—sharply falling oil prices and last year’s increase in the consumption tax.

Oil prices have in fact been a positive for the Japanese economy. The tax increase has been negative. Both will be temporary in their effects on prices.

That said, zero isn’t the lower bound for Japanese inflation. Prices could turn negative in the coming months, as utility companies cut charges after a lag. But lower energy costs will be a boon to the country’s economy in the long term, putting more cash in the pockets of consumers and businesses.

Of course, even the so-called “core-core” CPI, which also excludes energy and food, was up just 0.3% from a year earlier in February. This likely reflects the lingering effects on demand from last year’s three-percentage-point increase in the consumption tax.

The concern is that these temporary disruptions could conspire to keep Japanese people trapped in a “deflationary mindset.” To head that off, some speculate that the Bank of Japan might ease policy again as soon as next month.

But a deflationary mindset takes more than just CPI turning briefly negative. Other recent data show demand strengthening. Household consumption rose 0.8% from a month earlier in February. The labor market is tight, with the unemployment rate falling to 3.5% from 3.6% a month earlier. The ratio of job postings to applicants, already at its highest in decades, climbed further. And Japan’s largest companies have just agreed to the biggest wage increases in many years.

And besides consumer prices, asset prices, from stocks to land, are rising. Export volumes are picking up. This isn’t what deflation looks like.

Japan may have laid a goose egg on inflation. But with so much else going in the right direction, the BOJ is unlikely to ramp up the stimulus just yet.

U.S. Oil Output Not Even Slowing Let Alone Falling

Another week, another record high for U.S. oil production, now topping 9.4 million barrels per day, or about 1 to 2 million barrels more than the nation needs each day. Moreover, despite a collapse in drilling rigs, the rate of increase (15% y/y) hasn’t even slowed. Shale producers are simply pumping more oil out of their best
performing wells. While supply will eventually ebb as these wells run dry, the short-term risks for oil prices are clearly on the downside. (BMO Capital)

image

BMO looks at the YoY rate of change. Others have noted that last week’s production rose only 3000 barrels, down to a trickle… 

EQUITY VALUATION

Posted yesterday:

Only fools and bourses – The ‘CAPE’ ratio can be useful but do not take it at face value