Headlines that make laugh: Discerning the agenda behind the headline

Posted by

0

I have started this  series of post, “Headlines that make laugh” to discuss how one might determine the quality of financial news, its biases and whether its judgments are based on anything like expertise or knowledge.  The questions I ask when I read the financial news are:

(1) How does the writer know or what is the basis of the claims that he makes?  Is he an expert?

(2) What are the writers biases?  Does he have an ax to grind?  Is he promoting a false narrative? (Such as” Obama saved Egypt from the tyrant Mubarek”)

Let’s consider this headline about Petrobakken which I follow because I own shares:

The headline focuses on a negative point and the Thomson Reuter’s article begins:  “Canada’s PetroBakken Energy Ltd said fourth-quarter production fell 9 percent due to operational delays and natural production declines from wells.”  Now this is interesting.  It is a negative headline, and one would assume that the author doesn’t like Petrobakken and he wants to see the shares plummet.  Perhaps his real agenda is a hatred of the Canadian oil industry, so he wants to bad mouth it.  Or perhaps, because the author of the Thomson Reuters article is the world’s export on petroleum companies, he’s decided to highlight the press release’s most salient point, cutting through all the crap in the report which was full of bewildering statistics, numbers and assertions.  So we really must congratulate Thomson Reuters for having such perceptive writers!

Many other headlines that I read focussed on something a teensy bit more positive (e.g., Marketwire):  “PetroBakken Replaces 274% of Production and Increases Reserves by 18% in 2010”, but of course, this headline is coming straight from the company press release, so this is the “propoganda” that the company wants to present, spinning bad news into good.  Or perhaps, the press release focuses on the 274% production replacement and 18% reserve, because these are the really important numbers which affect the long term prospects of the company.

Who knows?  In any case, the two headlines have two different effects on the reader:  One is intended to be decidedly negative with the intent of forcing the share price down; the other is decidedly positive whose authors hope to give the share price a boost.  The DIY investor must never discount bias in the sources of information at his disposal.  Many would say it is necessary to read between the lines of press releases and of course this is true.  But I wouldn’t put it past Thomson Reuters to attempt through their headlines to hurt the evil Canadian oil industry—what with their carbon footprint and oil sands which is “dirty oil”.  See what I mean?

The New Berlin Wall II : New fee for those wishing to renounce US citizenship

Posted by

3

One year ago, I announced that I had applied for Canadian citizenship with intention of renouncing my American citizenship.  I wrote that the US has tried to erect a Berlin Wall to keep American citizens from expatriating:

Since 2008, the US has placed particular restrictions on wealthy people who wish to expatriate.  If I were to own 2 million in assets or if my average net income tax over the last five years were $139,000 , I would be a “covered expatriate” upon renouncing my citizenship.  The law penalizes these individuals with exorbitant expatriation tax that boggles the mind.  Why?  To keep them in the USA.  So it is a Berlin Wall designed to keep people from leaving the US.

Now the US government has piled another bunch of useless rubble against that Berlin Wall.  I read in the US Consulate in Toronto’s website the following (emphasis mine):

Renunciation: We accept applications to renounce U.S. citizenship and forward them to Washington DC for a decision, which takes several months. This process CANNOT be expedited. You may contact us by mail, fax or email to request information and proper forms. Once you are ready to renounce, you must make a special appointment by emailing us … and proposing a date at least two weeks in advance. All renunciation appointments are at 10:30 a.m. We will respond and confirm the date and time of your appointment or propose a new date depending on staff and appointment availability. Note that there is now a US $450 fee to renounce U.S. citizenship, payable at the time the renunciant takes the Oath of Renunciation from the consular officer inside the Consulate.

Well, this is embarrassing isn’t it?  The US prides itself in being the best country in the world, the one where everyone and his brother wants to live.  But now they will just add one more insult to injury to their citizens living overseas: in order to escape the jurisdiction of the US, escaping citizens must pay $450.  Well, from the standpoint of fleeing the greediest government in the world, that will soon become desperate for revenue because of hyperinflation, it’s probably a small price to pay.

In any case, my citizenship application to Canada was accepted, I took the citizenship test Wednesday February 16, and I have been invited to a citizenship ceremony next Monday, on February 28.  I’ll be contacting the US Consulate in Toronto tomorrow.  Au revoir.

Hyperinflation is now here II: Food prices

Posted by

11

Bruce Walker writes today at the American Thinker that food prices are what is going to do in President Obama’s chances in the next election.  One of the signs of hyperinflation is spiraling out of control food prices, and Walker points out that the food commodities are up 27% over the last six months.  I don’t know about you, but a 54% annualized increase in food commodities looks a lot like hyperinflation to me.  I wrote a post in August 2010 that dealt with food prices, which I reproduce here:

August 3, 2010

What’s wrong with inflation? Do you have enough to eat?

Monty Pelerin has a excellent article on inflation this morning.  He maintains that the great temptation for government will be to try to solve the problem of debt and unfunded obligations by inflating it away, and that, since politicians are cowards, they will not make the tough decisions to avoid inflation.  He writes, however, about the consequences of inflation:  “Inflation is as violent as a mugger, as frightening as an armed robber and as deadly as a hit man.”

I believe that the real danger of inflation may lie in the consequences it will  have on the food supply.  Never mind that food shortages have never been a problem in the living memory of most North Americans (unless they are over 75 or immigrated here from a war zone or something).  Today, obesity in developed countries is feared more than starvation.  So I made the following comment on Pelerin’s blog:

I am reading Adam Ferguson, When Money Dies (1975). He tells the story of Frau Eisenmenger, an Austrian who at the end of WWI had sufficient investments to live on and care for her family (31). She went into her bank in 1918 to withdraw some funds and her banker advised her to buy Swiss Francs, but it was illegal to hoard foreign currencies, and so she declined. Eventually, her savings became worthless. Her situation was greatly helped by her daughter working in the “American mission” paid in dollars, renting a room in her apartment to an American, and speculative investments in the Austrian stock market.

I fear that what will happen is similar to Europe in that period, when food was scarce and required a large percentage of income to procure. Eventually, the price of food will sky rocket and so more dollars will be created ex nihilo. Then the farmers will refuse to supply their food to people for worthless dollars and food stamps from the government, and they will have to stop producing–because their costs have to be covered too. Then, we will see shortages like never before. A farmer offered Frau Eisenmenger three month’s provision for her grand piano (33); and an acquaintance of hers sold her own piano for a sack of wheat flour.

Jeet kune do investing (III) vs. conventional investing

Posted by

5

I revealed offline to Mich at Beating the Index how much my portfolio (87%) is weighted towards oil and gas stocks, and only C.J.’s (my wife’s) defined contribution plan is in a balance fund.  He wrote:  “Your portfolio is high risk indeed! I imagined you would have some bonds and more utilities, you surprised me really …”  So I even managed to surprise another junior oil investor with my portfolio.

But let’s consider that conventional styles of investing are too rigid.  They present stereotypical strategies for conventional times.   If Bruce Lee had been a financial advisor, he would have advised his clients to adapt fluidly to the market–to anticipate the market’s moves and to respond in a way suited to each individual.  There are no recommended trades, for each investor is unique, with a unique set of risk tolerances, liquidity and investment goals.

I am an inflationista.  There is no doubt in my mind that Bernanke is creating money faster than the credit bubble is deflating; nor do I have any doubt anymore that the Bernanke Put is for real: no matter how fast credit deflates, Bernanke promises to pump it back up with fiat money.  Now the Bank of Canada wants to create inflation, albeit only 2%, but that they also want desperately  to keep the loonie on par with the greenback; and with these two strategies, governor Mark J. Carney will not be able to control run away inflation in Canada.  Indeed, one could argue that the Canadian housing market has already run away from him.   So now I have been investing for the last two years believing that hyperinflation is our opponent, and my jeet kune do moves must adequately anticipate and respond to that reality.

Consider these conventional strategies and how they cannot possibly succeed in time of hyperinflation:

(1) Get out of debt; (2) maintain a balance portfolio; (3) diversify your portfolio; (4) Subtract your age from 100 and this is the percentage of stocks vs. fixed income; (5) Real estate is always a great investment.

(1) Get out of debt.

Debt is always very bad if it is high interest consumer debt (credit cards, lines of credit). But for many people their mortgage is their best protection against hyperinflation–the currency can lose value much faster than you pay off the debt or interest rates can go up.  Creditors lose in inflationary times, and so it stands to reason that debtors can win, provided that their debt is not spent on frivolous consumer goods.

(2) Maintain a balanced portfolio.

A balanced portfolio puts the emphasis on having stocks for growth and fixed income for safety.  But it is questionable whether stocks in general are a good hedge against inflation.   Warren Buffet wrote an article during the height of the last great inflationary period (1977, Fortune Magazine):  “How inflation swindles the equity investor“.  Fixed income investments are a disaster during hyperinflation, especially today, with the rate of return being so pathetic due to artificially low interest rates.

(3) Diversify your portfolio.

I am not sure that this strategy works in conventional times, supposing that such times ever exist.  Diversification is not the same as not putting all your eggs in one basket.  My portfolio includes debt, real estate, oil and gas, and gold mining companies.  But it doesn’t include anything in aviation because my C.J.’s business is in aviation maintenance.  So you won’t see me investing in Bombardier, Boeing, Air Canada or West Jet, because if one company goes down, it can have a domino effect on the entire industry.  That’s not putting all your eggs in one basket.  But those who advocate diversification suggest that the investor either own an index fund or diversified mutual fund, or a roughly equal number of stocks in each of the major sectors of the economy.  I am pretty sure this will only lead to pretty mediocre results.  I’ve noticed over the years that most investor billionaires are barely diversified, but have made their money in highly concentrated moves:  for example, Warren Buffet is mainly an insurance guy.  John Paulsen shorted sub-prime mortgages then bought gold.  Sometimes it is better to get to know one or two industries really well, and stick to what you know.

(4) Subtract your age from 100 and this is the percentage of stocks vs. fixed income.

This bit of conventional wisdom has cost people a lot of money.  The last two years has provided pathetic yield on fixed income and meanwhile we’ve been in a great bull market.  Hyperinflation is going to wipe out whatever seniors have left and they’ll be saying a final “good bye” to their wealth.  The reason why this strategy is wrong is it has an imaginary understanding of what is a high risk investment.  Stocks are considered high risk and fixed income, low risk.  But in hyperinflation, there is nothing more certain to destroy a portfolio than fixed income investments.

(5) Real estate is always a great investment.

The sub-prime mortgage crisis has done much to destroy this myth.  For me, real estate has been a wash in the last two years.  The rental house we bought is up $70,000; but the commercial building in Texas which I bought with my brother has zero equity, is not breaking even, and $70,000 of my initial investment is basically a write-off.  But many people think that real estate will maintain its value in a time of hyperinflation. Gonzalo Lira trounces that myth in an article demonstrating that during hyperinflation the high interest rates and the unwillingness of creditors to lend out a rapidly devalued currency, destroys real estate prices.

Meanwhile, as of this moment, my concentrated jeet kune do portfolio is 86% above book.  Commodities go up during hyperinflation; so my stocks are nearly all in Canadian commodity companies (oil and gas, gold, and sugar).

Jeet kune do investing II: Toyota RAV4

Posted by

0

I consider a car a consumable not an investment.  Yet as an investor who strives to have “no style” –like Bruce Lee’s Jeet Kune Do, a style which is no style–today I signed a deal to buy a second RAV4 in two years.  This is not a necessity.  We do have the flimsy excuse that my assistant’s car has given up the ghost and he can now purchase my 2001 Pontiac Montana which probably has at least three years of life to go.  I could have driven it for a lot longer.  But here is why I’ve decided to buy the RAV4 now instead of waiting:

The price was identical to last year’s purchase, though the financing was a little different.  Toyota was under a lot of pressure last year because of all the negative publicity and Congressional scrutiny.  I chalked up this political harassment to Toyota’s main competitor being the US government itself, seeing as Obama had just bought two car companies, GM and Chrysler with taxpayers’ money.  So I felt that the bad publicity and the political harassment was unfair, and that Toyota was like a value stock, and besides, C.J. (my wife) needed a car.  You buy a value stock when you know the fundamentals are sound, but the market has abandoned it.  Toyota, which had become the number one car manufacturer in the world, had never offered 0 % financing until last year, when we bought C.J.’s RAV4 with 48 months 0 %; and this year’s RAV4 I’m getting at for 36 months 0 %.

Once I drive that car off the lot next week, Toyota Credit will have floated us over CDN $70,000 at 0 % (my RAV4 and the remaining debt on C.J.’s).  Why is that a jeet kune do move?  Because in times of inflation or hyperinflation, debt is the best hedge.  I am anticipating that cars are going to go up in price in the next few months because of commodity inflation, and 0 % financing will be an historic anomaly because credit will become increasingly expensive–to be honest I was surprised that anyone would still offer 0% today.  I expect the US dollar to experience hyperinflation in the near future.  The Canadian loonie will likewise experience high inflation, though not hyperinflation, as the Bank of Canada seeks desperately and unsuccessfully to keep the loonie at par with the greenback.  My gut feeling is that inflation will pay for all of the depreciation on both of these vehicles, and three years hence we will have become the clear winners, for we will have paid Toyota back in devalued currency.   If not, well, we will have paid no interest on the loans, so no big deal.

Finally, when hyperinflation hits the world and believe me, I think it is already well under way, people will be desperate to get their hands on real goods, for their currency will be increasingly worthless–and the bottom may fall out of the real estate market too.  As for cars, they are a real good.  Consider this anecdote from the colorful South American hyperinflationista, Gonzalo Lira:

A true story: In ’73, at the height of the Allende-created hyperinflation, an uncle of mine, who was then a college student, was offered an apartment in exchange for his car. That’s right—an apartment. He owned a crappy little Fiat 147—a POS if ever there was such a thing—but cars in Chile in the middle of that hyperinflation were so scarce, and considered so valuable, that he was offered an apartment in exchange. To this day, my uncle still tells the story—with deep regret, because he didn’t follow through on the offer: “That Fiat was in the junkyard by ’78, but that apartment still stands! And today it’s worth nearly a half a million dollars!” Actually, I think it’s worth a bit more than that.

In the style that is no style, the jeet kune do investor must be able to anticipate the future.  The best way to do that is to study the past.

A note of caution:  this is not a recommendation to the esteemed readers of this blog to go out and buy a car.  It relates to our personal circumstances and investment style–or no style (see Jeet kune do investing I).