Powered by Blogger.

Home

Showing posts with label Stock Market Crashes. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Stock Market Crashes. Show all posts

SP 500 Plunges To Where The Day The Market Went Nuts And The Forex War

Thursday, May 20, 2010

Stocks plunge as fear spikes! Fear? Fear? Fear?

Was there not justifiable reason for the plunge?

Why blame it on fear?

Time to look at the SP Charts.

It's fun.



Wonder what those arrows pointed in the volume bars are suggesting.

Then of course I remembered again the posting More On The Day The Markets Went Nuts? (see also Massive Funds Cashed Out Of Equities ) and the SPY is very close to the lows of that spectacular day.


What does this suggest? I saw Jesse penned some views on it and I am going to paste it here.

  • As a reminder, option expiration is tomorrow for stocks, and next week for Comex precious metals options.

    Did the Flash Crash probe the way lower? Traders, and I am one, are notoriously superstitious and suspicious about such unexplained movements, suspecting that they are exploratory and will likely be retraced.


    Well, we're there. Wash and rinse. Wax on, Wax off. Make it on the way up, and on the way down. As long as you are fleecing the sheep. That is how you gain a perfect trading record, if you are dealing the cards, playing with guaranteed house money, and peeking in everyone's hands, if even only by milliseconds before they make their plays. Get them buying hope, and then selling panic. It's all good if you can keep the money moving across your tables.

Well.. how?

And then we have incredible battlefield in the forex last night.

Did you not see?



Look at that beauty.

Frame it up!

Tyler of Zero Hedge sums it up: Breathtaking 250 pip Intraday Move In Euro As Central Banks Try To Kill EUR Shorts, Goldman Loses More Money For Its Clients

  • The move in the EUR has just hit ridiculous levels, with the nearly 300 pip intraday move comparable only to the EURCHF surge seen yesterday after quadruple SNB intervention. And frazzled US quants, having no clue what to do, decide to once again turn on the EUR signals pushing the market higher, with a 10% chance of a green close. Make no mistake - this is reciprocal liquidation, where morning margin calls in all other pairs were met by EURUSD covering of shorts, exacerbated massively by what is now almost certain ECB (not SNB) intervention. The negative here is that Germany will look at the Eur response and pitch its naked short ban to all other European countries, which will now gladly accept the proposal, myopically hoping for another 1-2 bp move in the EURUSD. We believe there may well be an announcement of a Europe-wide naked short covering ban this weekend, coupled with the imposition of a transaction tax.

LOL! And yessirme Goldman Sachs again gave bad advice to its clients as mentioned by Tyler.

  • Amusingly, Goldman which earlier decided to once again so short the EURUSD has once again lost its clients money even as Goldman adds another day to its Q2 perfect quarter. And while we dont have confirmation on that yet, Goldman's FX desk just closed a trade initiated on May 10 with a stop loss for a 3% loss.

Here is Goldman Sachs words:

  • Trade Update: Stopped Out of Long MYR, IDR and PHP vs JPY with a Potential Loss of -3.5% May 20, 2010We were stopped out of our tactical recommendation to be long MYR, IDR and PHP vs the JPY at the London close, with a potential loss of around -3.5%. We entered the trade on May 10th at a level of 100, shortly after the package from the European heads of state was announced. Our recommendation was based on the assumption that the package would assuage the risk jitters in the market stemming from liquidity and solvency fears over Euroland, and that the market would start to trade the macro data once again. In the event, markets have remained more jittery than we had anticipated

My... stopped out of LONG MYR???!!!!!

LONG Malaysian Ringgit????????????

Read more...

More On The Day The Markets Went Nuts

Friday, May 7, 2010

Posted yesterday: 8 Points And More On Yesterday Plunge

from TraderMike:
May 6, 2010 Recap: The Day the Market Broke


  • There’s a lot of talk about some fat-fingered trades and technical issues causing that steep drop but I think that’s masking deeper, fundamental issues. Currencies were trading wildly all day, well before the 2:30 debacle in the stock market. Even Dennis Gartman said he’d seen nothing like those currency moves in his 30+ years of trading. I watched a lot of CNBC tonight and most of the talk is about what can be done regulation-wise to prevent the kind of slide we saw today. It made me flash back to October 2008.

Yves from Naked Capitalism : On the Fat Fingered Trade and Market Freakout

  • The idea that a fat-fingered trade out of Citi was the cause has been denied by the bank. The downdraft did have the look of a monster sell order, but the more credible explanation is that it was either a sudden rise in yen or the euro hitting the magic number 1.225 to the dollar that set off algorithmic traders. And enough of them look to similar indicators and technical levels that it isn’t hard to see this as the son of program trading, mindless computer-driven selling when the right triggers are hit.

    But another side effect of today’s equity market gyrations is further distrust in the markets, particularly by retail buyers. I am told that various retail trading platforms were simply not operating during the acute downdraft and rebound. I couldn’t access hoi polloi Bloomberg news or data pages then either. The idea that the pros could trade (even if a lot of those trades are cancelled) while the little guy was shut out reinforces the perception that the markets are treacherous and the odds are stacked in favor of the big players (even though we all understand that, it isn’t supposed to be this blatant).

Here's another version:

  • Fil Zucchi at Minyanville:

    'Since everyone has an opinion on yesterday's 5 minute plunge, let me offer this:

    •We've oft discussed that a tell-tale sign of risk withdrawal is a rising JPY/USD
    •Currency movements are measured in 1/100 of a cent
    •Between 10:50 and 14:00 yesterday, the JPY/USD rose 307 bps.; that's the kind of move people usually position for over a year period, not 3 hours
    •Between 14:00 and 14:10 the JPY/USD gained another 100 bps. ; the S&P 500 (SPX) fell a modest 6 points in that time frame
    •The plunge in the equity markets began in earnest at 14:10, after traders were already disorderly buying JPY/USD
    • After 14:10 the JPY/USD gained another 150 bps. And that's when the SPX went into a tail-spin


    Interpret the data as you wish, but
    the JPY/USD signaled crash-like risk aversion before the SPX went off the cliff. Maybe panic caused a "fat finger", but to these tired eyes, the selling was no mistake.'

    Oh ye crazed randomwalkers, no doubt some revisionist rationale will be provided as to why the models don't, can't, and won't explain this latest 'reality' show.

    The initial mongering (PHD and the like) crowd will hold up as a sticks-and-glue proof, that the bubbles in your soda pop do in fact explain the bubbles in your portfolio, something called the Generalized Auto-Regressive Conditional Heteroskedasticity Model and its variations. Seriously, you can look it up!

    My retort? Got fractals?

    What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun.

    The Band of the Hand can only create a Potemkin demand...

    As in, the Atlanta Fed confirming that the major contributor to income growth during the past several months has been transfer payments.

    As in, that birth death model... it ain't payin' no taxes!

    Bread and Circuses divert folks from staring at the 'chickenless' pot...

    As in , no Fed audit, no breakin' up the banks, but hey we might limit ATM fees to 50 cents!

    And soon coming to the cineplex near you, the horror film, 99 Weeks Later.

    They will inflate until they can’t. Inflation rewards those that have their wealth first. All roads lead to deflation. The stock market will bottom when no one cares. Much like the aristocracy when the barbarians are at the gates… you save the silver (banks) first. They will destroy the village (dollar and markets) in order to save it. After the deflation is overwhelmed, the West will never be the same.

    In 1982 S&P bottomed at 6.6 P/E, a 15% earnings yield...

    In 1974 S&P bottomed at 7.9 P/E, a 12.66% earnings yield...

    In 1932 S&P bottomed at 5.6 P/E, a 17.86% earnings yield...

    And 2012 is 40 days and 40 nights from 1932 dontchaknow...

    History ingeminates and the truths you hold to be most dear are lies told to you by liars.

Featured on Zero Hedge. Dissecting The Crash

  • Having seen the capitulation unfold second by second and then listen to CNBC come up with every excuse under the sun just got under my skin. I've decided to chart some of our one second analytics charts of the capitulation unfolding on our screens. The chart below (more to follow) captures the moment of the final capitulation, before the reversal today. The idea that it was a 'fat finger' error is ludicrous; unless the fat finger hit every market in the world virtually simultaneously. Liquidity simply left the world financial markets for about four minutes this afternoon. The bids just vanished. And what else vanished? Remember the vaunted supplemental liquidity providers, led by Goldman Sachs. Remember that they are paid to "provide liquidity" through their predatory high-frequency algos, they are not required to do so. So when the S@#$T hit the fan they just disappeared. In one second more or less someone (and yes, under these circumstances, human beings take control of the machines) made the decision to pull the bids on every equity in the S&P, every financial futures contract, every FX contract in every market in the world. This kind of thing just doesn't happen in a pure auction environment; there just isn't a tight enough communication link between the parties to allow the decisions to propagate within the same second -- even with HFT algorithms. No. Some human made the decision to pull the bids; all of them, all at once. If that is not a condemnation of the concentration of financial power and the systematic risk it engenders I don't know what is.

    As you look from the top to the bottom of this chart (1 second histograms) you will see first the TICK of all US securities falling rapidly; then as it hit -3700 (that's a record 3700 stocks ticking down vs up), look down the chart and see what happens. The markets freeze; there are no bids anywhere. There is virtually no trading, no shares changing hands (e-mini time and sales will show 8 or 10 contracts at each level for some moments here, but that is virtually nothing).

    The next graph is the ESM10 e-mini contract. At 1444 and change it just drops like a stone. The EURJPY below it goes into free fall at exactly the same second. The USDJPY below it drops but then holds steady for nearly a minute (carry unwinders are at this point looking for dollars ANYwhere, even against the YEN).

    At about the same moment the 10yr US treasury futures contract catches air; the money has to go somewhere. Gold ironically does is behind the 10yr futures in getting rocketed. This is the kind of thing we take a couple of hours to deconstruct; more on this in a follow-up post. But notice that we have the same phenomena here: there are suddenly no offers for either the treasuries or gold. (note I am comparing apples and oranges here; GLD vs 10yr FUT; this bears further analysis; if the lag bears out, but then switches out at some other point in the (near) future we would find this extremely significant)

    Now, next you see Procter & Gamble. I included this because it was the focus of the idiotic (and I mean this with all the love in my heart for the CNBC 'analysts'; it must be tough when you don't have a teleprompter). Supposedly there was a 'glitch' that caused PG to trade hugely down. In reality it simply behaved in unison with every other instrument in the entire global market at that moment. The bids were gone. Nevermind that the NYSE didn't trade that low; they only control a quarter of the action anyway; ask someone what their supplemental 'liquidity providers' were doing at that moment.

    You can see by looking at the $TICK above that not all stocks traded quite the same. There are courageous (read foolish) retail traders out there that actually put a bid in when they disappeared everywhere else and got hit.

    Otherwise, in every other market, NOTHING got hit until nearly SIMULTANEOUSLY the bids were back in the market, albeit at a hugely lower price (vice versa for GLD and treasuries). At this point, in most (non retail markets) there was such a huge spread that it took nearly 3 minutes (minutes!) for the bids to find someone to buy from -- at this point the sellers, algos watched by humans, are anticipating a snap-back and are not going to sell cheap. The drop into the abyss is over and 'normal' trading resumes, on about 14:48. Volumes, and the order book flow were a sight to behold. Hopefully it was a once in a lifetime event; but don't hold your breath.

    Finally notice that the EURUSD and AUDUSD are slightly late to the game to recover. Although the auction resumes about the same time, they continue to print precipitously longer. This is all the confirmation of Cluesix' AUD analysis I need. No one is talking about it today, but after Asia tonight they will; Asia (and even China) are next

Aslo on Zero Hedge: Here Is Who Traded What And How Much Yesterday

Last but not least, here's a recommended posting from Macro-Man. Do give it a read. :D

The Sea-Change

Read more...

8 Points And More On Yesterday Plunge

Thursday, May 6, 2010

Taken from the http://www.thereformedbroker.com/ : There Had to be a Second Trader…On the Grassy Knoll, Perhaps?


  1. For starters, let's all keep in mind that these things don't happen in a healthy tape. The jitters from Greek rioting and possible contagion were the necessary preconditions for a crash like that.
  2. The "Fat Finger" thing is nonsense. Maybe someone made a sizable error, but one cannot deny the fact that the algo-driven tradebots poured gasoline on the fire. The machines were triggering stops and wrecking everything in sight before human beings with qualitative senses could get a handle on what was happening. Congress is planning the hearings as we speak.
  3. For me to enter a sell order for a retail brokerage client of 500 shares of Microsoft ($MSFT), I need to go through 3 screens of verification and order confirmation. How is it possible that someone with the clearance to sell 16 billion shares of the S&P Spider could even have a typo? If I have 3 screens to confirm a trade, how much order verification does he have?
  4. Look at your keyboard...the "M" for million is not even next to the "B" for billion. There's an "N" in between the two keys. Dude, how fat is your finger?
  5. If you were intentionally trying to chase the last of the individual investors from this market you couldn't have written a better script than "accidental trade vaporizes trillions in value from US stocks". People are just disgusted already.
  6. Cramer was so money today. Whatever you think about him in general, he's the guy that came on CNBC down 1000 and told you that these were fake quotes, to go buy Proctor & Gamble ($PG) down 20 points. He was cool, calm and perfect in that slot.
  7. We still don't know whether or not any of the trades from that session will be unwound by broker/dealers. There were a ton of stop loss orders hit and people missed fills entirely in many cases. We should hear about that soon. Let the bickering begin!
  8. Anyone who told you he bought down 1000 is lying to you. Bids were raised off those levels in seconds.

Another article from TraderMike: May 6, 2010 Recap: The Day the Market Broke

  • There’s a lot of talk about some fat-fingered trades and technical issues causing that steep drop but I think that’s masking deeper, fundamental issues. Currencies were trading wildly all day, well before the 2:30 debacle in the stock market. Even Dennis Gartman said he’d seen nothing like those currency moves in his 30+ years of trading. I watched a lot of CNBC tonight and most of the talk is about what can be done regulation-wise to prevent the kind of slide we saw today. It made me flash back to October 2008.
  • So back to the more fundamental stuff… The focus really needs to be on what’s going on in Europe and the possibility of global contagion. This afternoon CNBC had live coverage of a stand-off between Greek police and protesters of Greece’s newly passed austerity package. It seemed to me that as soon as the police surged to disperse that particular crowd is when the selling really got going. That’s what got the Dow from down 150 to down 300 or so. It’s anybody’s guess as to what caused the rest of that 10% slide. But let’s not celebrate because we ended down *only* 3%. Serious technical damage was done today. There’s also some talk that the market will *have to* test today’s lows based on what’s happened in the past. So this is certainly a time to stay on your toes — long or short. Fast market situations like today can be quite treacherous.
  • Worden was in rare form in tonight’s report, so I thought I’d share what he had to say. (Emphasis is mine):
    The Computers Did It!?!?
    I suggest you forget all this nonsense about the glitches in computers and software being the true culprits behind today’s near collapse. Today’s mentality would lead to charging the NYSE with fraud.
    The market has been waiting for something like this to happen since the bottom in March of 2009 occurred, over a year ago. Why? Because this is the way primary bear markets end. The market has to prove itself before a bear can advance into a bull market once again. It can only prove itself by going up and down a number of times until it becomes clear that it has the strength to go on to better things. It does this by providing comparisons with preceding trends in the opposite direction.
  • I should point out that the capitulation we saw today could be followed by repeated shakeouts of the same type. The first shakeout is almost invariably followed by at least one more shakeout. A series of shakeouts eventually form themselves into any one of many possible bottom formations, and the breakout above that designates that the bear is dead.

Here's an article by Bob Pisani arguing Why the Trades Were Clearly Erroneous

Read more...

Market Glitch Or Fundamentally Flawed?

There you have it: Glitches send Dow on wild ride

How?

Ok, yes there was a glitch but besides the glitch what was the market really saying?

Think about it.

The net is now flooded with articles on what had transpired. The two great articles posted that I would pay attention is: The Day The Market Almost Died (Courtesy Of High Frequency Trading) and PLUNGE! 1987 Style - Sudden Drop in US Stocks Driven by Program Trading and a Ponzi Market Structure

Give both of them a good read.

Read more...

Dow Plunges!

Monday, September 29, 2008

Yes stocks were hit bad as approximately $1.2 trillion in market value is gone after the House rejects the $700 billion bank bailout plan.

CBS Marketwatch reported the following.
House rejects financial-rescue package

  • The House on Monday voted down the Bush administration's historic $700 billion financial rescue plan, triggering one of the worst days for stocks and dealing a sharp blow to bipartisan efforts, despite repeated warnings about the U.S. teetering on the brink of an economic precipice.

    A clearly disappointed Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson blasted another dire warning Monday afternoon about stressed world markets reducing credit availability -- a threat to American jobs and livelihood.

    "This is much too important to simply let fail," Paulson said.

    Officials are trying to figure out what the next step will be for rescue-related legislation, and an aide in the House speaker's office said lawmakers are ready to work in a bipartisan way. U.S. stocks plunged when the vote results became clear, and the Dow Jones Industrial Average ended down 777 points, or 7%, to 10,365.

    Finger pointing followed soon after the vote. Republican leaders accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of driving away some GOP votes with a partisan floor speech. Rep. Barney Frank, chairman of the financial services committee, said Republicans may be "covering up the embarrassment" of not having the votes.

    "And because somebody hurt their feelings they decide to punish the country," Frank said. "I mean, I would not have imputed that degree of pettiness and hypersensitivity."

    Pelosi said bipartisan needs to move legislation forward: "The crisis has not gone away."

    Some House members balked at giving the Treasury immense power -- the ability to buy up hundreds of billions of bad debt. And there were ongoing complaints over insufficient accountability, transparency and large-scale government intervention. But Paulson, along with Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, has been intent over the past week on broadcasting warnings about dire consequences if the plan was even delayed.

    With elections approaching, lawmakers, both Democrats and Republicans, are under intense scrutiny, and nervous about voting for a plan that risks so much taxpayer money without any definitive promise of success. In the end, there were 205 in favor of the legislation and 228 against. Among Democrats, 140 voted in favor and 95 against. Among Republicans, 65 voted in favor and 133 against.

    Critics also say the plan inadequately addressed job losses and a distressed housing market --problems that underlie current economic weakness. Meanwhile, those in favor of the plan were looking to treat a manageable symptom -- the frozen credit market -- if not the actual disease.

    A vote in the Senate was expected Wednesday, and the president would have followed with a speedy signature.

Many thanks to Trader Mike for putting the plunge into perspective. The Worst One-Day Percentage Losses for the Dow, S&P 500 and Nasdaq »

  • Today was the third worst one-day decline for the Nasdaq. Here are the 10 worst percentage losses for the Nasdaq:

    October 19, 1987: -11.35%
    April 14, 2000: -9.67%
    September 29, 2008: -9.14%
    October 26, 1987: -9.01%
    October 20, 1987: -9.00%
    August 31, 1998: -8.56%
    April 3, 2000: -7.64%
    January 2, 2001: -7.23%
    October 27, 1997: -7.16%
    December 20, 2000: -7.12%

    The S&P 500 had its second worst day since 1950. (The data’s from Yahoo Finance and only goes back to 1950.
    The S&P 500 index was created in 1957, but it has been extrapolated back in time.) Here are the 10 worst one-day percentage losses for the S&P 500::

    October 19, 1987: -20.47%
    September 29, 2008: -8.79%
    October 26, 1987: -8.28%
    October 27, 1997: -6.87%
    August 31, 1998: -6.80%
    January 8, 1988: -6.77%
    May 28, 1962: -6.68%
    September 26, 1955: -6.62%
    October 13, 1989: -6.12%
    April 14, 2000: -5.83%

    There are a lot of October & September dates in that list!
    And finally the Dow. I’m not sure where today’s drop ranks but it’s not in the top 5 (via
    Dave Manuel).

    October 19, 1987: -22.61%
    October 28, 1929: -12.82%
    October 29, 1929: -11.73%
    November 6, 1929: -9.92%
    December 18, 1899: -8.72%

    From the data I pulled from Yahoo Finance, which only goes back to 1928, today was the 17th worst day since 1928.. It was the fourth worst in modern times — which is probably a better measure given how different the world is now. Given
    all the circuit breakers put in post the 1987 and 1989 “market breaks” it would be real difficult (if not impossible) to get another 22% down day. Here’s the modern top five worst Dow days:

    October 19, 1987: -22.61%
    October 26, 1987: -8.04%
    October 27, 1997: -7.18%
    September 17, 2001: -7.13%
    September 29, 2008: -6.98%

And on the NY Times, warnings are out that this financial crisis could spread worldwide! Financial Chill May Hit Developing Countries

  • September 26, 2008
    Financial Chill May Hit Developing Countries
    By MARK LANDLER

    WASHINGTON — As Europe and Asia play down the need for an American-style bailout for their banks, the crisis may threaten a different class of countries: those in Eastern Europe, Latin America and Africa that depend on foreign capital and shoulder American-style trade deficits.

    Alarmed by the threat, the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, Dominique Strauss-Kahn, is calling for a multilateral consultation — involving the United States, Europe, China and other financial powers — to develop a coordinated response to the crisis.

    “We’re facing a systemic crisis, and it needs a systemic response,” Mr. Strauss-Kahn said in an interview on Wednesday. “The I.M.F. is the right place to organize a global response to weaknesses in the global financial system.”

    His initiative is an attempt to thrust the fund back into the thick of world events — a role it played in previous financial crises in Asia, Russia and Latin America, but has not played in the current turmoil.

    Whether or not he succeeds, economists agree that Mr. Strauss-Kahn, a former French finance minister, has identified a risk. The crisis, by squeezing the flow of capital, threatens countries from the Baltic to Africa that depend on foreign money to finance their deficits.

    “There are a number of countries where you can get quite worried if capital flows stop,” said Thomas Mayer, the chief European economist at Deutsche Bank in London. “
    When you look at their high current-account deficits, Central and Eastern Europe seem particularly vulnerable.”

    A second category of countries are those who export oil or other commodities, and are vulnerable to a decline in prices — something that economists said would happen if the crisis hobbled growth. Oil plunged last week as Wall Street teetered, but it bounced back as hope rose for a bailout.

    “If the world economy does experience something like a global recession next year, those countries will be at risk,” said Michael Mussa, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics.

    There are more than 20 countries with current-account deficits that exceed 5 percent of their economic output, Mr. Strauss-Kahn said, putting them in what the fund considers the endangered category.

    Mr. Strauss-Kahn declined to name names, but outside economists listed Bulgaria, Estonia, Romania and Turkey as among the red flags in Europe. In Africa, they said, South Africa and Nigeria were worrisome; and in Latin America, Venezuela and Ecuador.

    The list, Mr. Strauss-Kahn said, does not include the four largest emerging-market countries — China, Russia, Brazil and India — which are running healthy trade surpluses or have hundreds of billions in foreign exchange reserves, though Russia is vulnerable to a drop in oil prices.

    Western Europe, economists say, is unlikely to be seriously affected, despite having banks that hold mortgage-related assets. This has made European officials reluctant to heed the Treasury Department’s call for them to undertake their own efforts to bolster the financial system.

    Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr. has resisted efforts by Congress to make foreign banks ineligible for the plan. But administration officials said they planned to set priorities on which ones to help, based on whether their governments were willing to help with the cleanup process.

    Two of the most threatened countries lie on Europe’s eastern frontier: Bulgaria and Romania, which have racked up high current account deficits and are running overheated economies.

    “These countries have been growing too fast or borrowing too much,” said Peter Akos Bod, a former president of the Hungarian central bank. “Should there be a sudden stop in capital, they would be in deep trouble.”

    Latin America is a perennial source of worry, given its history of troubled fiscal policy. For the moment, several countries, notably Venezuela, are benefiting from the soaring price of oil.

    But if oil and other commodities were to decline, said John Williamson, a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute who specializes in the region, “South America would be less comfortably placed.”

    Mr. Strauss-Kahn said he recognized that the monetary fund would be largely a bystander in this crisis, given that the problems began in the United States and remain largely a domestic banking issue.

    But he said the fund could play a role in giving advice. Among its suggestions: rather than buy distressed mortgage-related securities from banks, the Treasury should swap them for bonds, which Mr. Strauss-Kahn said would be cheaper and leave some of the risk with the banks.

    Mr. Strauss-Kahn said he also planned to confront one of the most politically charged issues at the fund: strengthening its pressure on China to allow its currency, the renminbi, to rise.

    Critics in the Bush administration and Congress say the fund has not pushed China hard enough on its currency. Mr. Strauss-Kahn acknowledged the difficulty of being tougher, given the politics of the fund.

    The fund’s last multilateral consultation, to discuss global imbalances, was held in 2006. It included China, Japan, the European Union, Saudi Arabia, and the United States. Mr. Strauss-Kahn did not say which countries would be invited to take part this time, though other officials said it would probably include those countries and emerging markets like Brazil and Russia.


Read more...

Has The World Markets Gone Kaput?

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

The signs out there are terrible!

On CNBC website Nowhere Near Capitulation Yet ...

!!

Is this doomsday or what?

Everyone is shouting that this is the worse crisis yet,
Worst Crisis Since '30s, With No End Yet in Sight and ECB doyen Otmar Issing calls crisis "extremely dangerous"

And then you have Michael Lewis commenting this on Sept 15th:
This Is the Day Asian Capital Woke Up



  • According to the bankruptcy papers thrown together over the weekend, the list of Lehman's 30 biggest unsecured creditors is dominated by Asian financial institutions: Aozora, Chuo Mitsui Trust, Sumitomo Mitsui Financial, Mizuho Corporate Bank, Shinkin Central Bank, Bank of China and so on.

    Who else did you imagine would be left holding this bag? Who else did you imagine was propping up the system?

    Ever since the government jumped in to bail out Bear Stearns Cos. -- and whatever else that was, it was a bailout -- the behavior of the U.S. government in the financial markets has felt like a mystery by an author who is cheating and withholding a key piece of information.

    In letting Lehman fail the federal government puts a fine point on an obvious question: Why didn't they let Bear Stearns go, too? This business about the markets having time to adjust to Lehman's problems is baloney. The markets didn't adjust to Bear Stearns collapse; the markets looked at what the Fed had done for Bear Stearns and assumed they'd do it for Lehman.

    Unfounded Fears

    One part of the answer is that the people who sit on top of our financial system simply didn't know what would happen if a big Wall Street firm went down. They have since studied the matter and concluded that their worst fears were unfounded.

    But in Lehman's list of creditors we have another part of the answer, I'll bet. It wasn't merely instability the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve feared. It was the loss of the good opinion of the people who supply the U.S. with the capital it no longer generates itself. For 25 years Asian financial firms have been amazingly indulgent of U.S. investment bankers.

    What do you think they're saying about them -- and us --now.
And it's no wonder that Asian markets are being hit bad, especially Hong Kong. This morning Raw Fear Slams Stocks, Hong Kong Plunges 7%

And the Russians aren't doing so good either.
Russia's Stock Market Woes


  • STRATFOR - The Russian markets plunged on September 16 before government authorities halted trading on the exchange an hour early; the MOSCOW Interbank Currency Exchange fell 17 percent, and the dollar-denominated Russian Trading System (RTS) fell 12 percent.

    The carnage built upon ongoing losses in the Russian economy that have now seen the RTS fall by nearly 60 percent since its mid-May highs. The Russian ruble has recently become the world’s worst-performing major currency.

    Russian government officials insist that this is simply a passing storm that has nothing to do with the August invasion of Georgia. While obviously an overstatement, there is something to the claim. Western financial institutions — and investment houses specifically — currently are engaged in a flight to quality investments. Russia, despite its ongoing impressive energy and minerals exports, simply never made the list of the top tier of reliable assets.

    But the fact remains that investors — and especially foreign investors — are scared. They were already nervous about the Kremlin’s flagrant targeting of foreign assets, and now the Russian willingness to invade its neighbors is most certainly a factor, as is the falling price of oil (Brent crude pushed below $90 a barrel Tuesday). Yet while the Russian stock markets are suffering because of the uncertainty, Russia is not necessarily suffering.

Chris Perruna's charts comparison of Shanghai and Nasdaq is most interesting, Shanghai is a Nasdaq Déjà vu

And the following webpage on NYTimes shows the extend of the damages: http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2008/09/15/business/20080916-treemap-graphic.html

So is Wall Street kaput?

  • Wall Street as we know it is kaput. It is not just that Merrill Lynch agreed to be purchased by Bank of America or that the legendary investment bank Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy or that the insurance giant AIG is floundering. It is not even that these events followed the failure of the investment bank Bear Stearns or the government's takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the largest mortgage lenders. What's really happened is that Wall Street's business model has collapsed.

    Greed and fear, which routinely govern financial markets, have seeded this global crisis. Just when it will end isn't clear. What is clear is that its origins lie in the ways that Wall Street -- the giant investment houses, brokerage firms, hedge funds and "private equity" firms -- has changed since 1980. Its present business model has three basic components.

    First, financial firms have moved beyond their traditional roles as advisers and intermediaries. Once, major investment banks such as Goldman Sachs and Lehman worked mainly for their clients. They traded stocks and bonds for major institutional investors (insurance companies, pension funds, mutual funds). They raised capital for companies by underwriting -- selling -- new stocks and bonds for the firms. They provided advice to corporate clients on mergers, acquisitions and spinoffs. All these services earned fees.

    Now, most financial firms also invest for themselves. They use partners' or shareholders' money to place bets on stocks, bonds and other securities -- so-called "principal transactions." Merrill and other retail brokers, which once served individual clients, have ventured into investment banking. So have some commercial banks that were barred from doing so until the repeal in 1999 of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933.

    Second, Wall Street's compensation is heavily skewed toward annual bonuses, reflecting the profits traders and managers earned in the year. Despite lavish base salaries, bonuses dominate. Managing directors with 15 years' experience can receive bonuses five to 10 times their base salaries of $200,000 to $300,000.

    Finally, investment banks rely heavily on borrowed money, called "leverage" in financial lingo. Lehman was typical. In late 2007, it held almost $700 billion in stocks, bonds and other securities. Meanwhile, its shareholders' investment (equity) was about $23 billion. All the rest was supported by borrowings. The "leverage ratio" was 30 to 1.

    Leverage can create huge windfalls. Suppose you buy a stock for $100. It goes to $110. You made 10 percent, a decent return. Now suppose you borrowed $90 of the $100. If the price rises to $101, you've made 10 percent on your $10 investment. (Technically, the price has to exceed $101 slightly to cover interest payments.) If it goes to $110, you've doubled your money. Wow.

    Once assembled, these components created a manic machine for gambling. Traders and money managers had huge incentives to do whatever would increase short-term profits. Dubious mortgages were packaged into bonds, sold and traded. Investment houses had huge incentives to increase leverage. While the boom continued, government remained aloof. Congress resisted tougher regulation for Fannie and Freddie and permitted them to run leverage ratios that, by plausible calculations, exceeded 60 to 1.

    It wasn't that Wall Street's leaders deceived customers or lenders into taking risks that were known to be hazardous. Instead, they concluded that risks were low or nonexistent. They fooled themselves, because the short-term rewards blinded them to the long-term dangers. Inevitably, these surfaced. Mortgages went bad. The powerful logic of high leverage went into reverse. Losses eroded firms' tiny capital bases, raising doubts about their survival. This year, Lehman lost nearly $8 billion in "principal transactions." Otherwise, it was profitable.

    How Wall Street restructures itself is as yet unclear. Companies need more capital. Merrill went to Bank of America because commercial banks have lower leverage (about 10 to 1). It seems likely that many thinly capitalized hedge funds will be forced to reduce leverage. Ditto for "private equity" firms. In time, all this may prove beneficial. Financial firms may take fewer stupid and wasteful risks -- at least for a while. Talented and ambitious people may move from finance, where they were attracted by exorbitant pay, into more productive industries.

    But the immediate effect may be to damage the rest of the economy. People have already lost their jobs. States and localities, particularly New York City and New Jersey, that depend on Wall Street's profits and payrolls will face further spending cuts. Banks and investment banks may tighten lending standards again and impede any economic recovery. The stock market's swoon may deepen consumers' pessimism, fear and reluctance to spend. There may be more failures of financial firms. It's hard to know, because financial crises resemble wars in one crucial respect: They result from miscalculation.

Read more...

Markets In Crisis: Is The End or Is The Beginning Of the End?

Monday, September 15, 2008

So the markets plunged pretty badly yesterday.

CNN had it as
Stocks get pummeled


  • "It was an ugly day," said James King, president and chief investment officer at National Penn Investors Trust Company. "Lehman's failure to find a suitor and Merrill deciding to cash in their chips before a similar fate could befall them really stoked the fears of the public."

    AIG exacerbated those fears in the afternoon. And all the bad news isn't out there yet, King said. "Investor confidence is at the lowest point we've seen in a while."
The Wall Straits Journal explained what has happened. Lehman Files for Bankruptcy, Merrill Sold, AIG Seeks Cash


  • The U.S. government, which bailed out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac a week ago and orchestrated the sale of Bear Stearns Cos. to J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. in March, played much tougher with Lehman. It refused to provide a financial backstop to potential buyers. Without such support, Barclays PLC and Bank of America, the two most interested buyers, walked away. Barclays said Monday it pulled out of the potential deal after deciding it wasn't in the best interest of shareholders.

    Early Monday morning, Lehman filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. Lehman said none of the broker-dealer subsidiaries or other subsidiaries of LBHI will be included in the Chapter 11 filing and all of the broker-dealers will continue to operate. Customers of Lehman Brothers, including customers of its wholly owned subsidiary, Neuberger Berman Holdings LLC, may continue to trade or take other actions with respect to their accounts, Lehman said.

Of course the Feds did try to calm the markets down. Fed adds most cash since Sept. 2001 to calm markets

  • The New York Fed added $70 billion in overnight repurchase agreements, known as repos. The central bank does a repo operation on almost every business day, but offered an unusually high amount today in light of the demand for reserves from banks and primary dealers.
  • The Fed adds reserves to the system in order to keep overnight lending rates near its target, currently 2%. The actual rate at which banks were trading fed funds Monday rose to at least 7% at one point, the widest spread over the target rate in at least 20 years, according to Tony Crescenzi, chief bond strategist at Miller Tabak & Co.

    The actual rate declined to 4% after the Fed's second reserve operation of $50 billion, the largest since seven years ago, when the central bank was trying to ensure markets could re-open for business.

    The rate being so much above the Fed's target "shows that demand for excess reserves is extraordinary," said Ray Stone, chief economist and co-founder of Stone & McCarthy Research.

    Money markets have effectively frozen up today because managers don't want to expose themselves to dealers in light of Lehman's bankruptcy, he said. So they're turning to banks to invest their short-term funds, but everyone offering overnight funds is demanding a higher rate to lend it.
    "I've been through many financial crises and this is all new to me," said Stone, who worked at the Fed in the 1970s.
  • Interest-rate futures jumped as traders see a 69% chance the Federal Reserve will reduce its benchmark rate at its meeting Tuesday to 1.75% from 2.00% to make borrowing and lending more feasible for a battered financial system.

    "We believe that the gravity of the situation requires a Fed ease of 50 basis points and a removal of the current 25 basis point premium of the discount rate" at which banks can borrow from the Fed directly, said T.J. Marta, income strategist at RBC Capital Markets. "Such a move would put the Fed 'ahead' of the market."

    Futures show a better chance, 84%, of that quarter percentage point cut taking place at the Fed's meeting Oct. 31.

FT.Com was more direct by calling it as World’s biggest banks join forces.

And FinancialSense market commentator was simply amazed and describes it as Disconnection: The US Financial System Morphs Into Wonderland in his market wrap editorial today.

Here's part of his long write. (ps. I had described the dollar as flying without wings on a chatbox. - Mr. Allison calls it as without fundamental legs to stand on. :D )

  • The dollar, without fundamental legs to stand on, has vaulted higher in near vertical fashion, wreaking havoc on all commodity-based assets around the world. The Fed has been forced to lend out nearly 60% of its balance sheet to keep the banks solvent. The US trade deficit is on track to be over $800 billion this year and the budget deficit could soar to $500 billion, counting small off-budget items such as the Iraq War. The credit crisis is exploding on Wall Street, while Main Street deals with a deepening recession. However in Wonderland, the dollar presses ever higher.

    Precious metals conundrum

    Physical gold and silver have grown scarce among dealers around the globe. Delivery delays and high premiums are common, from New York to London, from Dubai to Mumbai. According to Swiss bank UBS, the world’s largest gold bullion trader, “Physical demand continues at a record pace.” At the very same time, the paper prices of gold and silver have plunged, along with the stocks of the entire gold and silver mining industry. UBS notes that “huge liquidation of long positions on the Comex and OTC markets have been the major reason for the fall in gold prices.” Customers world-wide are paying large premiums for an asset that has been plunging in price. Extremely curious.

    Hurricanes in the Gulf no problem for oil prices?

    Last Friday, Hurricane Ike barreled into the Gulf of Mexico, a massive storm 600 miles across and headed for offshore oil rigs and large refineries along the Texas coast. During the day the price of oil drifted lower, ending at just over $100 per barrel. According to Reuters, fifteen U.S. oil refineries with a total capacity of 3.861 million barrels per day are now shut down in the aftermath of Hurricane Ike, the U.S. Department of Energy said on Sunday. In addition, 30 major natural gas processing plants with a total capacity of 14.55 billion cubic feet per day are closed in the Gulf of Mexico, including plants still impacted by Hurricane Gustav.

    Many rigs will need weeks, in some cases months, to get back to full production.
    On Monday, oil continued to drop after refineries escaped with less damage than expected, ending the day around $94.00 a barrel. If heavy damage was expected on Friday, why did the price of oil not launch higher in Friday trading?

    Perception becomes reality

    Senior Energy Analyst Charles Maxwell at Weeden & Co was recently quoted in Barron’s. Maxwell, 76 years old, was asked about the expectation that oil was heading for $75 a barrel. “It is the perception that really is changing, not the true value of oil throughout the system. The perception change involves whether we are going to move into an era where oil supplies will be generous and easy to find, and therefore relatively cheap - or whether those supplies are going to be closed off for both political and geological reasons.” Maxwell, a veteran analyst since the 1960’s, thinks oil is heading for $300 a barrel. For the short term, perception becomes reality.

    "In these most troubling of times, oil does not appear to make the cut as a safe enough haven," said John Kilduff, an analyst at MF Global, in a research note.
    So the US dollar has become the perfect safe haven for these “troubling times.” Even the White Rabbit himself would find this most curious.

    Black is white, Up is down

    As Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are nationalized and become wards of the state (at a cost of $300 billion or more), the Federal government's balance sheet takes on another 5 trillion dollars in debt. This is apparently great news, as the dollar continues to move up dramatically. The markets must believe this and other bailouts to come must be good for the dollar.
    However, without foreign capital flowing into our Treasury in much larger amounts, how will the government pay for all this largess (and the largess yet to come) short of printing massive amounts of dollars? For the moment, who cares, when up is down and black is white?

    The Grand Plan in Wonderland

    Even in Wonderland there is a method to this madness. Some have theorized that the Grand Plan, hatched by Treasury Secretary Paulson and Fed Chairman Bernanke, was to use the excessive leverage in the hedge fund sector and force a massive de-leveraging, crushing the commodity sector, boosting the dollar and taking the pressure off the financial sector. A key benefit was to lower the cost of gasoline to hard-pressed consumers just before the election. The plan has seemingly worked very well, however it is likely just a “holding action.” And when the hedge funds have de-leveraged and dumped their commodity positions, what next? It would seem the wildly oversold commodity sector may just rebound, perhaps violently after the de-leveraging ends. Timing is everything, and Paulson and friends just want to hold off the cracks in the dike for another six weeks.

    The part of the plan about taking pressure off the financial sector hasn’t worked out quite as well.
    With the dollar soaring and commodities plunging, the financial sector has continued in its primary trend, falling off a cliff.

    Wall Street implodes

    This past weekend, the Federal Reserve and Paulson frantically attempted to broker a deal to rescue Lehman Brothers, the 158 year old investment bank that was established before the Civil War. There were no takers. Lehman is basically insolvent due to its massive losses associated with its toxic real estate derivatives. This once-proud institution has been forced to file for bankruptcy. In a brief fit of good judgment, Paulson decided not to bail out Lehman by adding further public funds to the hundreds of billions already pledged.

    When Bank of America passed on buying Lehman Brothers, Paulson and company pushed B of A to buy Merrill Lynch, another financial giant on the edge of bankruptcy. Curiously, Bank of America, after a few hours of due diligence, decided to overpay and buy Merrill for $29 per share, a 70% premium over the $17.05 close last Friday. When asked why he didn’t wait until Monday to get Merrill at a lower price, Bank of America CEO Ken Lewis stated “the strategic opportunity was so compelling it couldn’t wait.” Bank of America must now digest both Countrywide Financial and Merrill Lynch, while dealing with the challenges of its own balance sheet. The billions of dollars of toxic sludge that Merrill carries on its books now becomes B of A’s problem. Whatever happened to prudent banking? Just how hard did Paulson twist their arm? Perhaps Paulson would just like a weekend off once in a while.

    Trillions in liquidity evaporate

    As Merrill is swallowed, Washington Mutual, Wachovia and AIG are on cliff’s edge, ready for their turn to take the plunge. It is likely the veteran bankers in the Big Apple have never faced anything this bizarre in their careers. Two trillion dollars in liquidity has exited the US financial system this year, and three trillion world-wide. Without this vital lubrication, how does this system keep chugging ahead? The financial system has disconnected. It is ugly out there and likely to get uglier. Welcome to Wonderland.

And the downgrade on AIG is not helping either! AIG downgrade could prove costly

  • NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- The pressure on troubled insurer American International Group intensified Monday night as a credit rating agency downgraded the firm.

    Another cut could prove very costly to AIG, which is scrambling to raise much-needed capital.

    Fitch Rating downgraded AIG to A, from AA-, saying the company's ability to raise cash is "extremely limited" because of its plummeting stock price, widening yields on its debt, and difficult capital market conditions.

    The company could be required to post $10.5 billion of additional collateral if it is downgraded one notch by one of the other major rating agencies and $13.3 billion of collateral if downgraded by both, Fitch said in a statement, citing AIG's July 31 estimates.

    Standard & Poor's late Friday warned it might downgrade AIG, placing the company on CreditWatch negative.

    Hoping to avoid such downgrades, state and federal officials raced Monday to help the insurer gain access to much needed cash. Credit downgrades could doom its business.

    New York State gave the nation's largest insurer the power to transfer $20 billion in assets from its subsidiaries to use as collateral for daily operations, said Gov. David Patterson. In exchange, the parent company will give the subsidiaries less-liquid assets.

    "It is simply giving AIG (AIG, Fortune 500) in effect the ability to provide a bridge loan to itself," said Paterson, stressing the company is financially sound and that no taxpayer dollars are involved.

    Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve asked Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500) and JPMorgan Chase (JPM, Fortune 500) to make $70 billion to $75 billion in loans available to AIG, the Wall Street Journal reported.

    However, any discussions are very preliminary, a source close to the matter told CNNMoney.com.

So gloomy?

Here's two quotes posted on Kirk's.

  • "When stocks pull back to their lows of the year -- in some cases, multiyear lows -- people avoid them like the plague. I don't get how it's different from a sale at Macy's. I mean, you don't see shoppers running away from sales when prices are marked down 50%, right? So what's the difference?" - Harry Schiller
  • "One of the many paradoxes of the stock market is that the worse it gets, the better it gets – at least, for those still able to invest." - Brett Arends

Read more...

Recent Stock Market Crashes

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Firstly I am not INSINUATING anything.

So do not ass-u-me anything for it will make an ass out of you an me. This posting merely looks at past stock market crashes and it does not attempt to say when and where the stock market crash will happen.


However, if you reckon that such a posting is taboo and it will be a jinx to your investments then do please not read. Ok?

There's this old little book by Neoh Soon Kean called Stock Market Investment in Malaysia and Singapore. It's published under Berita Publishing Sdn Bhd.

Here are some collection of comments from the book which I find to be very interesting.

from pg 14...

It is always difficult to determine exactly when a bull run starts, certainly much more difficult than pin-pointing the time a crash starts. Typically, a bull run always starts gently. The prices tend to bump along the bottom for a while before starting up and even after it has started, there may be a few false starts when the rate of rise would falter. With that caveat in mind, it is my opinion that the bull run started in Jan 1971 and the big marker break (that is the start of the crash) occured on 13 Feb 1973, an up-cycle period of about two years.....

The amazing fact is that in 1971 and 1972 could be regarded as bad years economically for Malaysia while 1973 and 1974 were, in fact very good years for both Msia and Singapore. Yet the latter two years coincided with the sharpest fall in the history of Msian/S'porean stock market. STi fell by 41% in 1973 and 42% in 1974.

Until after June 1973, the Malaysian stock market and the Singapore stock market were joint. The whole market was therefore affected by the economic well being of Malaysia. In the early 1970's Msia/S'pore was still very much an export-oriented region. The prosperity of many quoted co's in the stock market was much dependent on the export of primary commodities.

What were some of the factors which caused the big boom?

(1) Early profit was made

after May 13th incident of 1969, investors' confidence sank to an extremely low ebb. there was a very considerable amount of panic selling and the Straits Time Industrial Index dropped to a low of 130 in late 1970 from 170 in April 1969. Many shares were being sold at an extremely low level. The few investors who had the courage to buy then were to make hefty gains later on.

... even after another more than 40% rise in the overall price level by 31 Dec 1971, many of the stocks, were still very reasonable, especially the second tier stocks.

The early profits attracted a lot of investors into the market and again, the prices rose and by June 1972, ST had increased by another 20%. However from this point onwards, the people entering the markets were no longer governed by economic considerations.

The prices were to be increased by yet another 81% in the next six months (WAAAHHH), after which the end of the boom was in sight. By that time, the market had caught the speculative fever and price rises were no longer rational. The market was to rise another 41% in the final six weeks before collapsing. It is notable that the increase every six months got steeper and steeper. In the final three months or so, the increase of the index exceeded that of the previous 2 years! This rate of increase obviously cannot be sustained and the speculative mania ran out of steam and had nowhere to go but down.

... When a market is rising, everyone who goes in makes some profit and he is therefor encouraged to make further purchases. However, the continuous price increase cannot go on forever. At some point of time, the amount of money tied up is so high (at the highs, one lot of OCBC costs 50,000, a sum which was more than the selling price of two terrace houses at that point of time) (Fiyoh!!!! Now that's what u call BULL, eh?) that the buyer who buys in anticipation of a further rise will be forced to sell soon if the market is not going up. Once the market sees that a shares has stopped rising, the opposite goes into effect. The intending buyer will delay buying hoping that the price will fall further. This causes the weak intending seller to lower his price yet again. A spiral of forced selling at low prices is thus started and it tends to continue at ever increasing speed until eventually much, if not all, of the earlier rise is completely increased.

(2) Many were First Time Investors

For much of the 1960s, investment in the local share market was very much limited to the institutions, large corporation and a few well-off private individuals. The middle class was of a small number and wielded little economic power. However, with the Independence in M'sia and Singapore, the social spending of the governments were vastly increased and slowly a large body of middle class consisting of civil servants, doctors, teachers and other professionals were established.

Like the US of the 1920's investment opportunities in the late 1960's were the limited. Three months of fixed deposit was then paying 5% (Wahh... 5% now banyak lo). Naturally the stock market market attracted some of the money in circulation. As explained before, those who made profit early, attracted many others into the fold. The commentators of the time also pointed out an additional fact which caused a large number of first timers into the market. In late 1972, all teachers in msia received a considerable amount of back pay. The sudden receipt of an unexpected sum of money and the booming stock market at that time was all that needed to push many teachers into the market. Indeed in 1972, teachers' common room conversation was largely limited to the stock market. (LOL!!!! Wahh... so much happening inside ze teacher's in common room!!!... hohoho... playing shares when they are free??? )

These first timers had little idea of the economic principles upon which stock purchases should be made. Instead they relied on market talks, brokers' advice and self-proclaimed experts. (hehe... they become Sayur lor or some prefers to call it as Hong Kong Kai Lan) As a well-known Wall Street saying goes: 'Genius is a rising market'. the rapidly increasing prices gave all involved a vision of boundless prosperity and wealth ( hmmm... Grandiosity lo ). By the end of 1972, price rose to a level which could not be justified by any known economic standard.

... the price increase obtained were totally out of bounds of rationality. A PER of three digits is absurd by any standard but to the newcomers, PER was a meaningless measure. All they believed was that: 'If the prices had doubled in the past 6 months, they must be capable of doubling yet again in the next six months'. (ho ho ho... they believed that the stocks could really fly up, up and awayyyyyyyy hor!!... and today's high is tomorrow's low eh?)

(3) Rapidly Rising Foreign markets

(4) Trust in 'Blue Chips'

(hmmm.... is this where the common advise to buy blue chips come from?)

In the Crash of 1973, the top tier company was made much of finance, properties and a few old line companies such as Sime Darby and Haw Par. The enthusiasm for these top tier stocks was such that most others were largely ignored. The PER of the favoured stocks would rise to an astronomical level while for the less favoured, their PER would remain at a reasonable level even at the height of the speculative mania. The over-concentration of interest in a specific class of stocks naturally meant that the price rise would be even more phenomenal. Unfortunately, when the crash came, all stocks, favourites or otherwise, were brought down. Stock market crashes knew no favourites.

The higher the stocks rose, the worse they fell. Many ex-market favourites lost over 90% of their peak price. Local newspapers reported many cases of bankruptcies and several cases of suicides directly attributed to the stock market collapse.

But stop it did as it must in all slumps. The severe losses that took place traumatised the speculators for many years. When the overseas market picked up in 1975, the Msian/Sporean market failed to do so decisively. The prices bumped along the bottom for many years until 1979.
At the time, once again the lessons of history appeared to have been forgotten and Msian/Sporeans indulged in yet another speculative orgy......


The Crash of 1981

In magnitude, it is almost as severe as the first Crash.

First, it would appear that there were sound economic reasons behind the rise of share prices this time. M'sian/Sporeans had learnt sufficiently to depend on their own feelings on how the economy was doing rather than rely on foreign indices. (Ahhh... the problem of de-coupling our own market from others... be independant lo) At the time of the beginning of the bull run (approx Jan 1979), both Dow Jones and Financial Time Indices were in the doldrums. The local economic environment at the beginning of 1979 was vastly better than that of 1970.

(the tables in the book.... showed that price of rubber went from 1.99 to 3.25, price of tin went from 18,736 per ton to 35,710 and CPO went from 882 to 1177)

.... commodity prices were approaching or just below their respective all time high. Most of the companies directly or indirectly involved in the commodities business were doing extremely well and were flush with cash.

... per capital GNP had been rising most steadily for five years at an average of about 15 per cent. More than that, the private sector was very liquid with cash. In 1979, the money supply of Msia was standing at a figure that was five times higher than in 1971!

With profit increasing at a rapid rate, a PER of 20 or more seemed fully justifiable. (yeah... look at Cycle... price went from 2.62 to 5.25, and yet the PER only increased from 10 to 13... there is growth!!) As the memory of 1973 faded away and the mood of the country totally changed (market sentiments lo), stocks were once more respectable investments. Thus, more and more Msian/Sporeans invested and saw their investments steadily increased in value...

Secondly, the timing was right this time. In 1978-1980 the economic horizon was bright and it was natural to envisage an extended period of prosperity. Indeed the governments did promise just that. It is natural to bid up the price of stocks at the top of an economic cycle and until mid-1980, the prices of most stocks were very reasonable. Not many people, if any, could have foreseen the recession of 1982 (two years away still)

Thirdly one could detect several signs of market efficiency which was most surprising in view of what happened in 1973. Even at the height of the speculation some shares were being quoted at very reasonable prices. At the maximum level Bata, C&C, SIn Heng CHan and many others could be bought at a PER of less than 20. Given the Msian/Sporean context, the PER reached could be considered rational. Purchases even at those prices would not have been unwise investments if the region's growth rate of the late 1970's were to continue into the 1980's. Furthermore, it is noticeable that many of the plantation and tin mine stocks turned down well in advance of the general market. Many plantation stocks peaked in 1981 and most tin stocks even earlier on. This can be shown by comparing the KLSE Industrial Index with the prices of popular plantation and tin stocks. Considering that the poor corporate reports were not to be published for yet another year, this was a very creditable performance. A considerable number of investors must have taken note of the softening price trends of rubber, cocoa and tin at the point of time and started to liquidate or reduce their holdings.

It must be stressed, however, that despite these pockets of efficiency by late 1980's, the usual symptoms of a speculative mania were making their appearance. Trading on the stock market became more and more widespread among the populace. The mania was slowing taking hold in the minds of the people and soon many of them would throw rationality to the wind.

By early 1981, the mania had once again reached epic proportion. The prices again showed the accelerating rate of increase that is common to all manias.

Once again, a large number of ignorant and inexperienced people were attracted to the stock market. Remisers set up operations in every small town and did roaring business. In a typical small town like Teluk Intan, butchers, rubber merchants and small holders from the surrounding areas would crowd into town in the afternoon to take part in the rush to buy and sell shares. Even the universities were not immune to the temptation of the market. Many lecturers from each of the local universities were heavily involved. Housewives of all ages spent their days at the brokers' offices, no doubt finding it more exciting than a game of mahjong. (LMAO!!!..... hohoho.... mania!! Err.... Lecturers involved again? Soooo does this mean that these buggers are great BULL indicators???..... and kakaka.... if 2nd Auntie is so busy playing mahjong.. then u know stock market ain't too happening hor!!! )

The Conglomerate Game.

.. the value a speculator places on a stock (or a tulip) does not necessary depend on anything which is tangible. Rather, it depends on the image or fantasy the investor may have on a particular stock. A company that is continuously in the public eye ( a result of a continuous stream of announcements of bonus, rights, takeovers and profit forecasts, etc.) is that much more likely to become the object of such fantasy. ( Aha!!... got fancy CREATIVE story to sell??) In the same way, an actress who is always in the news is far more likely to become the object of a man's fantasy. Stocks of such companies are far more 'attractive' (sexy stocks?) and are more likely to be bidded up to a far higher level than the dull 'never-anything-happens' type of stocks.

... Indeed the activities of several companies during 1980 and 1981 fit the description. they are the companies that were busily engaging in takeovers and mergers ( for example, MUIB, Hong Leong Industries and PEGI). With the announcement of each new takeover, their profit forecast would become greater and their prices attain a higher level. It would be indeed be foolish for these companies not to make use of their new found strength in the form of high stock prices to seek new takeovers by an exchange of shares. More takeovers led their prices to go even higher and an upward spiral took shape. What was realised by the public did not necessary mean higher per share earnings. This is because a lot of new shares had to be created to 'pay' for the takeovers. (ze dilutions effect lo!!!... BE WARNED! ) Therefore, the per share price should not necessarily go up between overall and per share share earnings was lost in the general madness to pursue high-flyers. Most of the newly-fledged conglomerates saw their stock price increase to a level that is ridiculous by any measure.

The Property Injection Game

Owing to various government and institutional obstacles, it has become increasingly difficult for a Malaysian company to become publicly listed. (Oh my, how times have changed!) For the five years prior to 1981, only a handful of new companies each year had reached such exalted rank. This naturally resulted in a great deal of impatience among entrepreneurs who were anxious to have access to the public capital market. Over the previous four or five years, this impatience had manifested itself in the form of an increasing number of entrepreneurs buying over control of a listed company and injecting his own properties into the listed company as a way of achieving public listing. Since taking over a successful company is not cheap, these entrepreneurs naturally turned their attention to less successful companies ( yalor - the lousy ones - ones that wud stretch and bend ze rules sikit!! ) , in particular, textile companies which were going thru a poor earning stretch.

... On taking over a moribound or semi-moribound listed company, the entrepreneur would use it to takeover their existing assets by a process which is locally known as 'injection'. Most of these assets being so injected had been real properties (ie pieces of land). To the local share buying public, real estate had a magical ring to it for did we all not know that: "All real real-estate developers are rolling in money?" Given this fantasy image of real-estate development, every time the re-organisation of a moribound listed company into a real properties development company was announced, the public went wild bidding up the price of the previously moribound or semi-moribound company to incredible heights. Not only was there an enormous enthusiasm for companies actually being re-organised this way, the speculation spilled over the companies which might be taken over.

This when Taiping Textile was being reorganised the stocks of South Pacific textile, Imatex and Textile Corporation all went up in sympathy even though there were NO concrete news. As mentioned earlier, since the 'Property injectors', were only interested in moribound or semi-moribound companies, we have the most curious phenomenon whereby stocks of companies which would normally be considered as not particularly good, were bidded to an unjustifiable level even for a good company.

(The Goreng of the Chekai and Lousy stocks????)

The End is Near

Thus, if one were to refer to a list of most active stocks for the two years before the Crash of 1981, one would see that much of the activities centred around either conglomerates or re-organised companies or companies rumoured to be facing re-organisation. The day of reckoning arrived when the prices were bidded up to a ridiculously high level and when weak holders become anxious. Like in all slumps, once nervousness started to appear, confidence rapidly ebbed since it was not based on anything tangible in the first place. The market peaked on 26 june 1981, and lost rapidly almost HALF of its value within the next four months. there were a few anaemic attempts atrallying which all failed to go very high. This went on for about eight mnoths. In late July 1982, stock prices began to drop again, slowly at first and then sharply to result in a market loss of another 100 points.

( .... hmmm.... the dangers of using of year high and year low as an indicator to buy stocks lor ... cause .... if one used such indicator as a guide.... surely KENA big, big time lo .... so think it is wise to use a contrarian approach to buy a stock based on low prices?)

There is an ironical twist in the end of the story if the Crash of 1981. The market went down rapidly from a high of 823 on the KLSE to reach a low of 364 after fourteen months. This means a decline of about 58% in just over an year, a very rapid fall by any standard. One would expect it to continue falling further and stay down for a while to catch its breath as in most speculative collapses. This however, did not take place as the local speculators did not seem to have suffered enough and the market started moving up again toward the end of 1982 and was to reach a very high level of 680 by Feb 1984. Most local speculators were ecstatic over the unexpected rise and most local stock market commentators were expecting renewed climb to new heights for 1984. Once again, the unexpected happened and 1984 turned out to be another bad year for local speculators.

The Crash of 87!


At the time of writing (June 1988), it may be premature to write the history of 1987Crash as the full story of this crash has not yet been revealed. (Aisehhhh... what la.... !!.. I told you this little book is OLD what!). However, the global stock market crash of Oct 1987 has become part of the folklore of the investment world and it would be negligent if this story is left out.

In some ways, it is more difficult to get a 'handle' of this Crash than the two Crashes previously described. There were no obvious villains as in the earlier crashes. The bull market was intense and broad based, to be followed by a crash of unprecedented severity. The amazing thing to most casual observers of the market is that the crash took place just as both Msia's and Spore's economy were getting into full steam after two years of unprecedented low growth.

It is to be admitted that the economy of both countries were expected to do well in 1987/88 compared with the previous two years but the growth rate which has been achieved is low if compared with the heydays of say 1975 or 1981 when the economy grew at twice this rate or more. In spite of the mediocre economic rate, the stock market put up one of the best performances ever.

... It matched the growth rate of the bull market of 72/73 all the way.

From the start of bull market up to its peak, the SES All Shares nearly doubled while the KLSE increased by 167%. This is to be contrasted with an expected total growth in GNP of about 15% for 1987 and 1988. An examination of the earnings trend of the listed shares on both exchanges is even more telling. Apart from commodity companies and certain turnaround situations (eg Cycle & Carriage), the improvement in EPS between 1986 and 1987 is not particularly remarkable.

The increase in the EPS between 1986 and 1987 is only 18.7% for the Sporean stocks and 34.6% for the Msian stocks. Their March 1986 PER (based on 1987 EPS to allow for the expected increase in EPS) at the start of the bull run were not particularly low by usual financial standards (respectively 13.8 and 21.9). At the peak of the bull run, their PER can be said to be very high indeed and probably not sustainable.

The experience of the non-blue chips more or less mirrored that of the blue chips except the former were more extreme in their movements. In spite of the none-too-low PER level of the majority of the stocks in March 1986, the market took off in the classical manner with an ever increasing rate of increase that is so typical of a speculative stock market boom. Readers may like to compare it with the rate of increase experienced in the previous two booms described earlier.

Thus by Sept 1987, many local stocks were selling at prices which were completely out of line with the fundamentals. [ same symptoms lo - prices went totally out of whack!! ] The earlier two tables in message 33 and 34 shows the PER of a selection of stocks at the top of the market compared with the highest PER during the previous bull markets. It is safe assumption that the shares do indeed look expensive compared with previous stock market tops.

Why should the market height it did, if there are no strong fundamental reasons to account for? (LOL!! No strong fundamental reasons? Kaki-kia?)

Influence of the Foreign markets

There is little doubt that the four years up to 1986 saw one of the best periods for stock markets worldwide. It is interesting to compare the performance of the various stock markets of the world between 1982 and 1983 to that of the local market.

.. the local market was the only one which had done badly in the four years preceding 1986. Furthermore, by Jan 1986, local bear market was 26 months old, a very advanced age for a bear market. Given the very powerful psychological stimulus provided by the continuing strong advances in most major markets, it is not surprising that local investors took heart and got the bull market underway.

Local commentators also attributed foreign buying ti giving the market further impetus. There is no doubt that there was some foreign buying although the exact quantity is unknown. A figure of US$2-3 billion has been cited by various commentators. This figure us quite small relative to the overall capitalisation if the market (US$50 billion, at the peak). However, given the poor liquidity of the local market, foreign buying could give quite a boost to the local prices.

Low Local Interest Rate

Due to a combination of factors, interest rate sank to a historically low level by early 1987. In Singapore, interest rate reached a peak in 1980, declined quite sharply in 1981 and held steady from 1982 to 1984. In 1985, interest rate in Singapore started to decline again, by early 1986 the three month fixed deposit rate was down to 4.5% and by early 1987 it was down to 2.85%.

In Msia, the decline in interest rates was even more precipitous. The interest rate hit a peak in 1984 with the three month fixed deposit rate reaching 10.5%. The rate declined to 7.25% in 1985 and 6.25% by end of 1986 before diving down to 2.5% by mid 1987. ( WOW!!! that's a sure DEEP falling rates!!!... and with such low interest rates... where to put ze moola??)

In the face of interest rate being less than the average dividend yield of the stocks at the time, is not surprising that large amounts of money flowed into the stock market, thus driving up the prices.

Economic Recovery

For both countries, 1987 was an incredible turnaround year. Both countries achieved the highest growth in five years. The improving economy meant higher income for the people. Even more than that, the psychological impact of a good year after two dismal ones must have been very great. Everyone must have felt as if a great weight had been lifted off their shoulders and the general cheerfulness and good feeling may have contributed to a great deal of optimism about the market.

Lack of Other Investment Avenues.

The lack of other avenues of investment is an important factor for a stock market to boom to reach speculative proportion. In 1986/87, this condition was fully met. The only other investment alternative apart from stocks and deposits, for laymen was in houses. By 1986, the housing market in both countries was in a severe slump. What is worse, the slump did not look as if it was going to end soon. There was therefore totally no incentive for investing in homes.

Granted that there were good reasons for going into the share market, it is understandable that the market should have gone up. But what is not comprehensive is that why should the market go up so much especially for the Malaysian stocks.

I feel that once again, the local stock market players had let their emotions take over from their senses. A more charitable interpretation would be that the typical investor still did not have an understanding of investment fundamentals such as PER and DY. In this sense, they were no better than the players of the previous speculative booms. Once the market went up strongly, they would enter the market, attracted not by the value represented by the shares but by the mere fact that they have gone up so much. The market went into a self-sustaining upward spiral. (LOL!!!... kaki-kia dude!!!)

...(As we can see from the tables in the book) the PER (most of them 3 digits PER some had PER over 230!! and most had NM (not meaningful) PER cos they were companies which were losing money!) were typically so high that prices could not be sustained once the reasons for the rise in the first place disappeared.


Thus, once the collapse hit the other markets, the interest in local market largely vapourised as well and the market took a plunge of unprecedented short term severity.

The tables (in the book) shows the magnitude of the fall amongst a selection of speculative and investment grade shares. Once again, the volatility of the local market was clearly demonstrated. Even though our market started moving up much, much later than the major markets, our decline was more severe than any of these except hong Kong. Latecomers to the speculative scene once again must have suffered enormous losses. (err... buy high, sell ... ???)

Conclusion.

These three adventures to Manialand have shown all too clearly that local investors are still far from rational in their approach to investment. Their behaviour in 1987 was not much improved from that of 1973.

If anything, what can be noted is a very disturbing development, the local market seems to have become more speculative not less. (Ahemmm... now? any changes? ...how? ) The first truly speculative boom of modern time took place in 71/72 and there was a gap of over 8 years before the next speculative boom (that of 80/81) took place. But after the boom of 80/81, there were 2 more episodes of speculation within a space of seven years.

An even more disturbing fact is that the local market has not effectively progressed since 80/81. Between 70 and 80, the local market gained about 400%. But from 80/81 to 87/88, the market hardly moved at all. What this means is that had an investor bought near the top of the market in 1973, he would have bought in at the top of the market in 1981, many would still be out of money today.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


the ENd.

Stock Market Investment - Neoh Soon Kean
Berita Publishing Sdn Bhd. 1989 (ISBN 967-969-066-0)


~~~~~~~~~~~~

And what about the crash of 1987?

Here is a highly recommendable reading.

Published on the US Federal Reserve Board and written by Mark Carlson.

  • The 1987 stock market crash was a major systemic shock. Not only did the prices of many financial assets tumble, but market functioning was severely impaired. This paper reviews the events surrounding the crash and discusses the response of the Federal Reserve, which responded in a number of ways to support the operation of financial markets, including the provision of liquidity, in a highly visible fashion.

Click here for the full report: Full paper (186 KB PDF) Full paper (Screen Reader Version)

ps: Hope you enjoyed it! I did!

Cheers!

Read more...

  © Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP