Bulls, Bears & Bucks #50: Het uur van de waarheid

quote:

Fed Signals More Action as Slump Drags On
Recession Began a Year Ago, Making It Longest Since Early '80s, Panel Says; Bernanke Considers Rate Cuts, Bond Purchases

Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke laid out new steps the Fed might take to lift the economy, as the panel that monitors the U.S. business cycle said the nation has been in recession for a year -- the longest downturn in a quarter century.

The National Bureau of Economic Research said Monday that America entered recession in December 2007. Mr. Bernanke flagged the likelihood of further relief for the sagging economy at a speech in Austin, Texas.

More reductions in short-term interest rates are "certainly feasible," Mr. Bernanke said. But with the Fed's benchmark rate already at 1%, more cuts would bring the rate to near zero, prompting concern that the Fed would be out of recession-fighting ammunition. Mr. Bernanke sought to emphasize other steps the Fed might take to spur the economy.

Those steps could include an unusual attempt to bring down long-term interest rates by purchasing Treasury notes and bonds, something the Fed hasn't done since the early 1950s. Lower long-term rates would help bring down mortgage costs and other borrowing costs for businesses and individuals.



A flurry of bearish news, including a decline in a key manufacturing-activity index, helped push the Dow Jones Industrial Average down 679.95 points Monday, or 7.7%, wiping out about half of last week's gains. It was the 12th-biggest single-day percentage drop and the fourth-sharpest point drop since the Dow was created in 1896.

Mr. Bernanke's comments helped stir more buying of longer-term Treasury bonds, to which investors already had been fleeing. The yield of the benchmark 10-year Treasury note, already at its lowest level in more than 31 years, fell further, to 2.719%.

The onslaught of troubling economic news also raises the chances that Democrats will push for a stimulus package during a lame-duck session of Congress this month, and make it more likely that President-elect Barack Obama will increase the size of the government-spending program he is designing. After the November election, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she favored a stimulus package of between $60 billion and $100 billion this year, followed by another round of spending next year.

"Economic activity appears to have downshifted in the wake of the deterioration in financial conditions in September," Mr. Bernanke said in his speech. He pointed to a litany of soft spots: in the job market, household finances, exports and financial markets.

The news is not all dire. The unemployment rate, at 6.5%, is rising but still well shy of its 7.8% level after the 1990-91 recession or the double-digit levels of the early 1980s. Mr. Bernanke also noted that falling oil prices have been a relief to households. But even that bright spot is related to the weak economy, since the global downturn is sapping demand for energy.

Once financial markets manage to improve, the Fed chairman warned, "economic conditions will probably remain weak for a time."

Rule of Thumb
The conventional rule of thumb is that a recession is two consecutive quarters in which the nation's gross domestic product contracts. The NBER, however, doesn't follow that formula. To pinpoint broad declines in activity, it considers a wide range of indicators in addition to overall economic output -- including payroll employment, industrial production, inflation-adjusted income and business sales activity.

"Many of these indicators, including monthly data on the largest component of GDP, consumption, have declined sharply in recent months," the NBER said in a statement.
[Ben Bernanke] Kelly West/Austin American-Statesman

At 12 months and counting, the downturn is already longer than the last two recessions in 2001 and 1990-91, both of which lasted eight months. If the current cycle persists past April, it would be the longest recession since the Great Depression. Downturns in the 1980s and 1970s lasted 16 months each.
'Fairly Bleak'

"The economic outlook looks fairly bleak," said Harvard professor Jeffrey Frankel, who serves on the NBER's recession-dating committee, but said he wasn't speaking for the committee. "Forecasts that the trough would be sometime in the middle of next year don't strike me as especially pessimistic given the current situation."

In November, economists surveyed by WSJ.com projected the recession would persist through the first quarter of 2009.

U.S. GDP declined slightly in the fourth quarter of 2007 and third quarter of this year -- but increases in between have complicated the NBER committee's decisions. A separate measure of output, known as gross domestic income, peaked in last year's third quarter but also fluctuated until this year's third-quarter decline.

The NBER committee focused primarily on employment, as it did in 2001, to pinpoint the recession's starting month. The expansion that followed the 2001 recession lasted 73 months, the NBER said, making it the shortest expansion in a quarter century. That expansion ended in December 2007, when U.S. payrolls peaked; they have been declining at an accelerating pace throughout this year.

"We wait until we're sure that it is a recession," said Stanford economist Robert Hall, chair of the NBER recession-dating committee. Mr. Hall said the committee looks for "the depth, duration and dispersion" of the downturn before making a call.

Severe Downturn
New data underscored the severity of the current downturn. The Institute for Supply Management's November manufacturing index, released Monday, fell to its lowest level since 1982. The ISM's new orders index -- a forward-looking indicator -- hit its lowest level since 1980, reaching 27.9 from 32.2 in October. That measure has fallen below 30 only three times in 60 years.

Meanwhile, construction spending posted a steeper-than-expected drop in October, according to government figures. The November employment report, due for release Friday, is expected to show nonfarm payrolls dropped in excess of 300,000 with a further increase in the unemployment rate.

Mr. Bernanke's comments set the stage for an important meeting of Fed policy makers in two weeks. The Fed's main lever to help an ailing economy -- short-term interest rates -- has already been pulled about as far as it can go.

Pushing down long-term interest rates could spur business and consumer demand, Mr. Bernanke said. Many consumer and business loans are closely linked to longer-term Treasury yields.

During the 1940s, the Fed maintained a ceiling on long-term government bond yields at around 2.5%. It created ceilings on other government debt as well.

It could bring down long-term rates now by purchasing Treasury bonds itself. A central bank has the capacity to effectively print money by injecting reserves into the banking system and could use the funds to buy securities like bonds. In normal times, this would be highly inflationary. But Mr. Bernanke noted that the recession is putting downward pressure on inflation now, which gives him flexibility to keep pressing with new measures to battle the recession. He also said the Fed would unwind its programs when the economy stabilizes, to help guard against inflation.

The Fed has already taken a big step toward targeting long-term interest rates. Last week, it said it would buy up to $600 billion in debt issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Ginnie Mae and Federal Home Loan Banks, all mortgage businesses with close tied to the government.

Yields on debt tied to these firms have come down, a development that Mr. Bernanke said he found encouraging because it has helped to rein in mortgage rates.

Impact on Interest Rates
Some Wall Street economists have argued that the Fed might also commit to keep short-term interest rates low for an extended period of time, something the central bank did in 2003 when it was worried about the weak economy.

Such a move in theory could also bring down long-term interest rates. But Mr. Bernanke didn't raise it as an option in his speech. Some economists believe the move by the Fed in 2003 backfired and helped to spur the credit boom that is now unwinding.

The Treasury Department could also take new steps. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said in an interview with The Wall Street Journal that he is "working really hard" to implement existing initiatives and develop new ones. Congress has authorized the Treasury to invest up to $700 billion to bolster financial institutions. Mr. Paulson has put nearly half of that sum to work.

The NBER makes judgments only on recessions and expansions in the U.S., but much of the rest of the global economy is in recession by other standards. The 15-nation euro zone, whose economy is second in size only to the U.S.'s, contracted in both the second and third quarters -- two-straight quarters of decline being the traditional definition of recession.

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 december 2008 21:03 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

Beleg iig in meerdere bedrijven ipv je 50k spaargeld ofzo in 1 fonds te stoppen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 december 2008 21:08 schreef Lemmeb het volgende:

[..]

50k is imho eigenlijk te weinig om (actief) mee te beleggen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 december 2008 21:18 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

Wacht op een recessie, ga in aandelen, wacht op hoogconjunctuur en cashen.

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 december 2008 21:19 schreef Lemmeb het volgende:

[..]

Als je dan ook nog eens goed gaat spreiden, dan betaal je je toch helemaal blauw aan transactiekosten?

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 december 2008 21:20 schreef pberends het volgende:

[..]

Als je spreid over 5 fondsen ben je bij aan en verkoop in totaal 100 euro kwijt.

Das niet erg veel als je minstens 100% rendement kan halen in recessie versus hoogconjunctuur-beurstijden.

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 december 2008 21:22 schreef Lemmeb het volgende:

[..]

Nee, da's niet veel. Maar 5 fondsen, is dat een goede spreiding? Als er één slecht presteert en één helemaal over de kop gaat, ben je al je winst al kwijt.

quote:

Op dinsdag 2 december 2008 19:37 schreef LXIV het volgende:
Nah, dat ben ik niet helemaal met je eens. Niet iedereen (=bijna niemand) kon inzien wat de consequenties van deze overname in combinatie met de credietcrisis zou betekenen. Zelfs het bestuur van Fortis zelf niet! Dus om nu die aandeelhouders de schuld te geven.

Mensen moet wel inzien dat beleggen risico's met zich meebrengt, en dat je dus kunt verliezen. Zeker wanneer je niet goed spreid.

Mensen die nu nog tegen een tophypotheek een huis kopen, die zijn veel onverantwoordelijker bezig! Want er zijn nu toch voldoende mensen die roepen dat ze dit vooral niet moeten doen, en genoeg indicatoren die ook voor een leek duidelijk moeten zijn, dat de markt omlaag komt. En toch koopen mensen. En toch zullen die over vijf jaar janken om compensatie. Sterker nog, er wordt nú al gejankt om overheidsmaatregelen, terwijl dezelfde organisatie een dag later beweert dat er überhaubt geen problemen zijn!

quote:

Op woensdag 3 december 2008 12:34 schreef HiZ het volgende:

[..]

Niemand kon het voorzien? Ik ben alleszins een amateur op dit gebied, maar ik vroeg me op het moment van de deal al af hoe Fortis in godsnaam onder de heersende omstandigheden aan het geld moest komen om die deal te financieren. En dat was toen het hele zaakje alleen nog maar een beetje was gaan stinken, dus voordat de ellende echt goed losbarstte. Mag je dan verwachten van 'experts' dat ze het ook een beetje doorhebben?

quote:

Over je pleidooi tegen top-hypotheken; dat roep ik al 20 jaar. Elke schuld is een liability, ook een hypotheekschuld. En als het minder gaat wordt zo'n schuld een molensteen om je nek. Vandaar dus dat ik mijn uiterste best doe om mijn hypotheekschuld zo laag mogelijk te houden. Mijn hypotheek ligt nu onder de 20% van het aankoopbedrag van mijn huis, en als het volgens planning blijft lopen, dan is ie over maximaal 5 jaar helemaal afbetaald. Die fijne 'hypotheekrente-aftrek' (ik noem het subsidie voor de banken) hoef ik dan niet meer.

quote:

Op woensdag 3 december 2008 13:46 schreef Lemmeb het volgende:
Niks mis met een vadsig hoge hypotheek, zolang je er maar wel voor zorgt dat je een laag rentepercentage daarover betaalt en reserves hebt om een eventueel waardeverlies van het onderpand af te dekken. Dan kan het een stuk goedkoper zijn dan huren, ook nu nog.

quote:

Op woensdag 3 december 2008 13:46 schreef Lemmeb het volgende:
Niks mis met een vadsig hoge hypotheek, zolang je er maar wel voor zorgt dat je een laag rentepercentage daarover betaalt en reserves hebt om een eventueel waardeverlies van het onderpand af te dekken. Dan kan het een stuk goedkoper zijn dan huren, ook nu nog.

quote:

Op woensdag 3 december 2008 13:57 schreef rvlaak_werk het volgende:

[..]

Dus als de rente in ene flink verhoogd wordt, ga je ook niet lopen janken dat het zo duur is geworden?

quote:

Op woensdag 3 december 2008 14:39 schreef Lemmeb het volgende:

[..]

Uiteraard moet je wel goed op blijven letten en je rente vastzetten voor een langere periode op het moment dat deze erg laag is (2 jaar geleden).

quote:

Op woensdag 3 december 2008 14:42 schreef rvlaak_werk het volgende:

[..]

Dan is er idd weinig aan de hand. Je blijft natuurlijk een risico lopen aan het einde van je looptijd, maar goed. Als je niet gaat lopen janken Good on you.

quote:

Dec. 3 (Bloomberg) -- Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs Group Inc. will
report fourth-quarter losses after securities markets deteriorated and
hedging strategies backfired, analysts at JPMorgan Chase & Co. and
Merrill Lynch & Co. said.

Morgan Stanley will post a 46 cents-a-share loss, and Goldman a $5.18-
a-share loss, JPMorgan analyst Kenneth B. Worthington wrote in a
research note today. Morgan Stanley will report a 35 cents-a-share
loss, and Goldman Sachs a $2.97 loss, Merrill Lynch’s Guy Moszkowski
said in a report today. Both had analysts had previously forecast that
Morgan Stanley would post a profit for the period, while Goldman would
report a smaller loss.

Goldman may write down the value of its private equity investments by
$4 billion after global equity markets tumbled, Worthington wrote. A
decline in credit and mortgage products in November will force Morgan
Stanley to post a loss for the quarter, Moszkowski wrote. Morgan
Stanley may be shielded from further losses because its private equity
and proprietary trading operations are smaller than Goldman’s, he
added.

“We continue to suggest investors avoid the sector as estimates
continue to fall and writedowns persist,” Worthington said. “However,
we expect Goldman will outperform longer-term due to a superior
culture and ability to alter its business mix.”

Cost reductions will also limit losses, Moszkowski said. Goldman’s
total compensation is likely to drop 43 percent from last year, while
Morgan Stanley will cut overall pay by 35 percent compared with last
year. Both Goldman and Morgan Stanley are based in New York.

quote:

U.S. Nov. ISM services falls to all-time-low 37.3%

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- Nonmanufacturing sectors of the U.S. economy contracted at a record pace during November, the Institute for Supply Management reported Wednesday. The ISM nonmanufacturing index fell to 37.3% from 44.4% in October. The decline was broad-based with 17 out of 18 industries reported contraction The decline was larger than expected. Economists were looking the index to fall to 42.7%. The major sub-indexes also set record lows. The business activity index fell to 33.0% in November from 44.2% in the previous month. New orders fell to 35.4% from 41.5%. The employment index fell to 31.3% from 41.5%. Inflation pressures eased. The price index plunged to 36.6% from 53.4% in the previous month.