Greenville Business Magazine 2009 November : Page 12

››columns The Patient - One Year After the Financial and Banking Accident BY ALLEN GILLESPIE | PHOTOGRAPH BY ASHLEY FULMER “ I n the January 2009 issue of Greenville Magazine, I suggested investors apply the principals of emergency medicine when examining their portfolios and deciding what to do next. In short, I wrote that you should not panic. Instead, realistically assess the situation and separate terminal companies (the ones that go out of business) from broad market investments which do not go out of business. Then sell only for valid reasons because selling in a panic can actually do more harm than good. I added that a recovery would likely begin with the least injured patients: the higher parts of company capital structures like bank loans and other fixed income instruments like bonds, convertible bonds, and preferred equity, recovering first, later to be followed by stocks. My final suggestion was that once the patient had stabilized, the final step in the recovery process would be to diagnose any longer-term issues and to develop a rehabilita- tion and recovery plan. Nearly one year later, the patient has stabilized and asset prices have risen sharply since January. Unfortunately, the long-term issues and recovery plan suggest we may be in the eye of the hurricane, the calm within a financial storm that 12 GREENVILLE BUSINESS MAGAZINE | NOVEMBER 2009 The growth of government spending crowds out consumer spending because someone has to pay for it. ” is still raging. Why the eye of the storm? Valuations and this equation: C+I+G+(X-IM) = GDP. I will explain. Today the dividend yield on the S&P 500 stands at a paltry 2.5 percent. At its March lows it was yielding over 4.5 percent. Historically, dividends and reinvested dividends account for a majority of an investor’s returns. Because companies reinvest the earnings not paid out as dividends, over long periods of time, stocks have appreciated an addi- tional 4 percent per year. One could argue that dividends are too low because companies are conserving their cash, which is true. But what are they reinvesting in and how much are they holding back? This leads to the C+I+G+(X- IM) equation. It stands for consumer spending (C) plus business investment (I) plus government spending (G) plus exports (X) minus imports (IM) equals aggregate demand — or put another way — the size of the economy. Our patient has stabilized because the government ramped up its spending through deficit borrowing in order to replace the drop off caused by bankrupt consumers. Also helping was the X-IM part of the equation. Crude oil imports account for the majority of America’s trade deficit, so the collapse in oil prices has been beneficial to our economy. When will the back half of the storm appear? It all depends on the growth of government spending, which is totally dependent of its taxing and borrowing ability. There are limits to both. The government hopes that consumer spending will return, but demographics suggest otherwise. Given that we just got a new administration and Congres- sional turnover in 2008, my guess is that it will be 2,4 or 8 years before we see significant policy changes in government spending. However, when we do, I suspect markets will return to their pre-government intervention levels. Following the panic of 1907, which I mentioned in the January article, markets recovered 100 percent over two years, then bounced around sideways for four years before falling all the way back to their 1907 lows in 1914 when war broke

>>columns - The Patient - One Year After the Financial and Banking Accident

Allen Gillespie

In the January 2009 issue of Greenville Magazine, I suggested investors apply the principals of emergency medicine when examining their portfolios and deciding what to do next. In short, I wrote that you should not panic. Instead, realistically assess the situation and separate terminal companies (the ones that go out of business) from broad market investments which do not go out of business. Then sell only for valid reasons because selling in a panic can actually do more harm than good. I added that a recovery would likely begin with the least injured patients: the higher parts of company capital structures like bank loans and other fixed income instruments like bonds, convertible bonds, and preferred equity, recovering first, later to be followed by stocks. My final suggestion was that once the patient had stabilized, the final step in the recovery process would be to diagnose any longer-term issues and to develop a rehabilitation and recovery plan.

Nearly one year later, the patient has stabilized and asset prices have risen sharply since January. Unfortunately, the long-term issues and recovery plan suggest we may be in the eye of the hurricane, the calm within a financial storm that is still raging. Why the eye of the storm? Valuations and this equation: C+I+G+(X-IM) = GDP. I will explain.

Today the dividend yield on the S&P 500 stands at a paltry 2.5 percent. At its March lows it was yielding over 4.5 percent. Historically, dividends and reinvested dividends account for a majority of an investor’s returns. Because companies reinvest the earnings not paid out as dividends, over long periods of time, stocks have appreciated an additional 4 percent per year. One could argue that dividends are too low because companies are conserving their cash, which is true. But what are they reinvesting in and how much are they holding back? This leads to the C+I+G+(X-IM) equation. It stands for consumer spending (C) plus business investment (I) plus government spending (G) plus exports (X) minus imports (IM) equals aggregate demand — or put another way — the size of the economy.

Our patient has stabilized because the government ramped up its spending through deficit borrowing in order to replace the drop off caused by bankrupt consumers. Also helping was the X-IM part of the equation. Crude oil imports account for the majority of America’s trade deficit, so the collapse in oil prices has been beneficial to our economy.

When will the back half of the storm appear? It all depends on the growth of government spending, which is totally dependent of its taxing and borrowing ability. There are limits to both. The government hopes that consumer spending will return, but demographics suggest otherwise. Given that we just got a new administration and Congressional turnover in 2008, my guess is that it will be 2,4 or 8 years before we see significant policy changes in government spending. However, when we do, I suspect markets will return to their pre-government intervention levels.

Following the panic of 1907, which I mentioned in the January article, markets recovered 100 percent over two years, then bounced around sideways for four years before falling all the way back to their 1907 lows in 1914 when war broke out, a full 7 years later. After the 1937-1938 panic, stocks recovered 60 percent in six months, went sideways for a couple of years, before falling back to those earlier levels, again during war in 1942, four years later.

One will notice the impact of war on the markets – but in those days the government was small except during war. Thus war led to an expansion in government spending. The growth of government spending crowds out consumer spending because someone has to pay for it. Ultimately, that is all of us either through taxation, inflation or a scarcity of goods and services.

Continuing the logic from my January article, the truth is, no one knows what the future holds. On average, investors earn compensation for taking risk. However, the government is underwriting risk at this moment.

The current market reminds me a little of 1999 after Hong Kong bought up 7 percent of its outstanding stocks. We all remember those giddy years when worthless internet stocks ramped up as the Federal Reserve “saved” the banking system by organizing the bailout of Long Term Capital Management. We felt better.

TARP, at $775 billion, is roughly equivalent to 7 percent of the U.S. stock market’s capitalization. Is the bailout of AIG or GM different than Long Term Capital Management? Are the U.S. markets that different from Hong Kong’s market?

When the future looks highly uncertain, as it did in January, probabilities actually favor investors earning their just compensation for taking risk. Now that the government has stabilized things and reduced uncertainty, the probabilities have shifted. Are they negative yet? Probably not, but every sprint horse eventually tires, which is why so few win the Triple Crown at New York’s Belmont Stakes – the longest race of the three.



Allen R. Gillespie is a principal of GNI Capital, responsible for portfolio management and investment research for all of the company’s managed assets.



The information contained herein should not be considered investment advice. Please consult with your investment professional before making any investment decision.

Previous Page  Next Page


Publication List
 

Loading