WTF

So Michael Lauer is free, and clear and free and clear.  It is a shitty shitty day for justice, and a victory for extractors and contrapreneurs alike. Pump-and-dump is a rotten game cynically preying upon the ignorant, the greedy, ignorantly greedy and the greedily ignorant. Machiavellian schemes of orchestrated share ramping through related-party vehicles transacting amongst themselves is patently Fraud (with an upper-case F). It likely that it was YOUR pension fund that was hit and YOU should be mightily pissed off.

One might speculate that in the intervening years, events have conspired to make Mr Lauer's antics and pilferage appear petty by comparison. And this too is shameful, and dishonest in its roots. Oh, and what's up with the eight years it took to come to trial? It is a very long time. Too long. This also is sad. Fortunately, there is an amusing punch-line to the story: Mr Lauer says that he is going to get back into the hedge fund business!!!

I hope he gets what he deserves, because he didn't deserve what he got.

I *Heart* Jack Lew

Well-worth watching Charlie Rose's interview with Jack Lew. Consummately measured and balanced, uber-informed, politically astute and sensitive, Lew tackles most major political-economic issues facing the US, from taxes, deficits, inequality, healthcare, ageing & social security.  He comes across with a knowledge one sees in one's BEST history teacher, with the demeanor of the best coach/father one saw amongst the other kids - the kind that is thoughtful, but never yells (in public), and is always constructive and positive in his criticism, and champions the values necessary to the success of the team. Such a man (or woman!) is oh-so-needed in this position - less to  create consensus from amongst the vicious partisans across the aisle, but rather in order to appeal directly to the American people who will undoubtedly find sense in his patient explanation and no-nonsense communication style.

25 Things I Learned in the 25 Years After My First 21 Years

I have long wondered what they put in the drinking water at George Mason University. This recent post by Dr Bryan Caplan attracted much attention in the blogosphere. Whatever is in the water seems to be causing conjecture to morph into the realm of the categorically immutable. But perhaps this assuredness is merely part of his philosophical territory. It is so effective, it inspired me to reflect upon 25 things I learned in the 25 years after my first 21 years. This doesn't include the several years I spent unlearning many of the things I learned in my first 21 years (and note these are in no particular order).

Economics:

1. Supply and demand in itself fails to solve countless mysteries, particularly where externalities are rife, corruption abounds (both large and small), and markets rather less-than-perfect (which are many).

2. Almost anyone can understand supply and demand if explained calmly enough (and with stick-figure or cute warm-and-fuzzy "Hello Kitty"-like animation), except perhaps Art Laffer and Maria Bartiromo.

3. Poverty is terrible, but poverty amidst gluttonous plenty is worse such that income redistribution complementing economic "growth" (where "growth" results in increasing and unprecedented skewness of income distribution) is better than growth alone.

4. The causes of unemployment are varied and complex and include (amongst other things) high executive wages, oligopoly, corporate rent-seeking, and capital's excessive short-termism

5. Free competition that results in unchecked collusive oligopolies and de facto monopolies often results in the diffused abuse of consumers for the parochial benefit of managers and shareholders.

6. Free beer is always far superior to perfect beer.

7. Bad governments combined with a poorly informed electorate - with or without fiat money - have little control over real GDP or employment.

8. Hazardous morals,  particularly in insurance and reinsurance markets, result directly from the pull of greed and its tendency to adversely select unduly self-interested agents.

9. Optimism about the economy and the future, however true it may prove to be, is a poor substitute for critical thinking and trying to do better.

10. Communism was a disaster primarily because of poor fashion sense.

Philosophy:

11.  The greatest philosophical mistake is to ignore a Blinding Glimpse of the Obvious.

12.  The second greatest philosophical mistake is to believe that the prior statement is either philosophical or a mistake.

13. Betting on whether or not a debate will resolve "what's obvious" is easier than betting on the stock market.

14. There are no such things as an anti-empirical dualistic unicorns, and even if there were, they wouldn't resemble moral facts.

15.  If you look too hard for something, you end up looking up your own arse. (thanks to Iain Owings)

Politics:

16. Believers voting is, in itself, irrational, since whatever prevailed would have been divine will.

17  Libertarian (and farther right) beliefs that "The public interest is best served by no public interest" is total bollocks.

18. Government may not provide the best solutions to externalities problems, nonetheless, government's attempts to address such problems are better than waiting for "the market" to miraculously conceive solutions inimical to their parochial financial interests.

19. All government, existing policy and expenditure requires reflection and critical introspection to insure  its continued relevancy and appropriateness for the prevailing times that it serves: this applies to the structure, and institutions, as well as the programs and initiatives, despite its heresy to strict interpreters of the constitution.

20. Paternalism should not be viewed in the pejorative. A Parents responsibility is (quite rightly) to set fair boundaries, and subsequently [justly] encourage adherence as well as enforce them with consequences if violated. In addition to being fair and just, they indeed change over time and epoch. However, the Parent who neglects these responsibilities, as well as the children who rebel and/or subvert for fun or parochial interest,  very often conjure problems to majority of others.  

22. Archetypical Conservatives and archetypical Progressives are actually more different than cynics believe, traits distributed in roughly similar proportions across all societies of the world. By nature they are fundamentally predisposed towards different values, particularly with respect to preserving tradition and accepting change, respectively.

24. However, like Yin and Yang, both traits are useful and required to govern more optimally, via constructive embracing of change, but throttling its speed in order to avoid the upset that change typically brings.  Understanding this reality should encourage everyone to compromise rather than polarize.

25. It is quite obvious that America has a Government Revenue Shortfall problem, rather than a Government Expenditure Problem (since spending is bottom quartile, and revenue bottom quintile compared to peers), AND that the revenue shortfall is caused by historically low tax receipts collected from the wealthy, demonstrated by comparatively low marginal rates vs. last 8 decades of economic history. Far from stimulating growth (ahhhem....errrr Dr. Laffer...??!?!), these comparatively low marginal rates over the past decades have enriched a very few quite dramatically, while impoverishing the next generation of the many in terms of per capital debt.

(errrr... umm.... that's quite enough "things I've learned" hurled upon you)

Credit Where Credit is Due

Shame on Michael Lewis (apparently suffering a bout of PJ O'Rourke syndrome) for his woeful Bloomberg piece satirizing of the Fed handling of disclosure relating to liquidity provision in the heat of the moment. I am all for satire and criticism and satirical criticism is even better. But one must be careful to be "more or less right", else one becomes a demagogue - using a kernel of truth or plausibility to prey upon ignorance or misunderstanding   - say for example, like Glenn Beck.

To be certain, the US Federal reserve is not perfect. They have indeed made policy errors - sometimes in the pursuit of politics, some in defense of the moneyed class, sometimes  out of accidental miscalculation, while others in the pursuit of some strange misguided Randian philosophy cherished by the former Chairman. However, the provision of liquidity to almost any and all against well-relaxed collateral  - be they domestic or foreign - in the heat of the moment of monetary meltdown cannot and should not be fault nor belittled. In fact, everyone should take a moment and say "Thank You!" to Mr Bernanke (rather than Gordon Brown) not for savng the world, but most certainly for preventing more preventable depths of the crisis.  I wrote notes for a piece still sitting in posting drafts after I read Ron Paul's utterly inane remarks about the same upon release of the files suggesting that rather than a Thank You, his extension of emergency liquidity in the heat of the moment of the crisis demonstrated the Fed should be abolished.
If fault is to be found, it would be in the generosity of Fed pricing. They could have extracted a pound of flesh, and in my opinion, should have as a punitive slap to those surfing the edge of peak credit, or liquidity mis-match.

However, no public nor private purpose would have been served by allowing financial markets to cascade into oblivion due to system-wide requirements sell position into a falling market to make position. We would have needed to coin a new more-modern phrase for 21st century-style Herstatt risk, that would have been global, and grinded the real economy to a halt along with the financial economy. Sure, we would have recovered from that, and certain people that didn't lose (and perhaps should have) would have, but others (perhaps undeserving) would have benefitted, watering down justice. As it was, the dislocation took us way into overshoot, so imagine where it would have taken us without the liquidity provision. Is there a place where the tag line "I've fallen, but I can't get up" is true? Where is the Hayekian virtue in finding out when (the extreme outcome) is in fact preventable? Perhaps it will prove only a palliative. That is still alright as far as I am concerned, measuring "alight" against the public interest.  I am far far far more afraid of the deficits and the effect of interest rate shocks upon large, cumulative borrowings concentrated at the short end of the curve. QE still bothers me little.

So if Lewis et. al wanted to use their satire to greater advantage and good, they should give credit where credit is due, and set their sights upon diminished top-end tax-rates, a broken healthcare system, defense spending, and clipping the tail of future liabilities to restore confidence in fiscal future diminishing the risk of an interest rate ambush, or future loss of confidence causing a another cascade.

Flat Tire

One would have thought that the wisdom and experience accompanying age would improve one's wit and sense of humour.  Of course, P.J. O'Rourke maybe the exception to this inferred rule. Whatever the case, O'Rourke's lame diatribe against urban cycling hosted by News Corp's dearth-of-humour broadsheet,  the WSJ, makes one wonder why, with so many interesting events and ample public figures with foot-in-mouth disease providing ample fertile material, he has chosen to point his low-watt Petzl in the direction of the humble, utilitarian bicycle, and it's typically well-intentioned owners. One would be forgiven for wondering whether there is some personal hidden agenda which is at the root of his anger.

Was he perhaps vertically-challenged more than the average kid when his father removed his training wheels? Or maybe he has a simple case of Cyclophobia? Was he forced to ride his sister's pink two-wheeled hand-me-down with sparkly handlebar tassles? Did he have some traumatic accident while mid-teens involving a parked car attracting the unwanted attention of a female object of his desire? Was HE laughed at mercilessly in his own tight black shorts? Did some two-wheeled Sierra Club environmentalist best him by sleeping with his wife (or worse, marrying his daughter!)? The exploration of this petty tyrant, will, in any event,  make for an interesting discussion with his T. next session. 

It does, however, highlight a more general question: Do Conservatives and Progressives age more or less symmetrically?

So Long (and thanks for the all the....)

August 2008 now seems to be so far away (unless you are Jeff Gendell or similar). Most things have returned to "normal" (lower case "n"): Israeli's and Palestinians are fighting; Fox network presenters make nightly asses of themselves; Wealthy Russians battle amongst themselves for top rung on the BLING! ladder; BRICs (and most of what was formerly known as The Developing World") grow robustly; American party politics and State dysfunctionality plumbs new depths; kids and adults alike waste evermore time networking socially on-line, and the ratio of executive-to-line-worker-pay ascends higher. Markets too, have normalized, with most prices finding the place they left off before The Vomit Scene threw them off course: commodities march higher as BRIC demand conspires with all species of specs to vault levels upwards; the dollar descends; stocks globally rally; bonds remain relatively neutered by intervention. Indeed we could be in 2007 again, were it not for upsided-ness of middle-eastern politics, peripheral European CDS, and the American President's tan and articulateness.

Everything, that is, except the Japanese Yen (and by extension, the Nikkei), the former which remains at, levels incongruent with, well, everything else in the world. Of course most FX traders horizon is measured in units corresponding to the winding of the average mechanical watch (or less!). Even Google finance's "all time" historical data for Spot USDJPY yields the beginning of time as somewhere in 2004. The credit crisis took the USDJPY from 110 to 90. Many carry trades were necessarily puked. But not all. 2010 began with Short Yen being one of Drobny's "trades of the year" - a curse and sure sign of crowdedness for those seeking instant gratification or truly asymmetrical risk vs. reward. They, too, were puked out by the market's swap of the dollar for yen in carry trades, sending the Yen from near-term macro peak-crowdedness levels near enough in the mid-nineties to 80. This, accomplished all the usual things of further puking carry trades not unwound previously, and sucking in the mimetic trend followers. The quake, and subsequent market response, was probably the last hurrah, in comparison to a world of increasing relative normality. 

Timing is a of course bitch. When EURJPY was stupid in late 2006 it was a year and a half of topping and volatility before it moved decisively from 170 to 110. The Yen has been "up here" now for more than two years two major episodic pukes, reddening the arses of even the cleverest of specs. Big picture long term market memory has been erased from most grey matter. I do not make prolific calls, but I must exclaim, the time is now. The moons are aligned. Par (vs. USD) though 20% distant, will be here almost as fast as you can say "Jack Sparrow". It's spring, and it's a mighty fine time to sell some Yen calls and buy twice-as-many 1yr out-of-the-money yen puts, and then go do whatever it is you enjoy doing.  

Lipstick on a Pig

Cliff Asness & colleagues have just published a paper demanding critics rethink the "Japanese equity markets are a momentum graveyard" thesis. They attempt to salvage the pursuit of price momentum in Japan by arguing that momo and value should be seen as a system, and not in isolation. Fair enough. As a result, they argue, momo strategies have utility in such a system, and therefore, the nil return (before costs) that have acrued to momo in Japan over the past 29 years is a veritable virtue. IF, that is, a more optimal Sharpe Ratio is one's goal, and so it follows, therefore, that a nil-return dollar-neutral portfolio, which furthers this pursuit, shouldn't tarnish the pedestal upon which momo strategies rest, both in other equity markets and across other asset classes.

As Noam Chomsky is often revealed be, (a comparison Dr Asness will abhor), Asness is correct within the narrow epistemological framing of the question. But this is not setting the bar particularly high. Not in a discipline where descriptive information is abundant, and where the pursuit should yield something better than a "Dawkin's Skyhook" approach to describing the faceless catch-all that is in each occurance a likely alias of some more descriptively-articulate phenomena. Of course, we can foregive this oversight for Dr Asness, wouldn't be a very good business-man if he revealed what lay beneath this nebulous outer layer of the onion skin.

One would hope that, for their investors, they are delivering higher-calibre solutions to the task of delivering a more optimal - primarily value-based - dollar-neutral portfolio in Japan, for they do exist. But do not expect in this paper a monumental revelation, or a raison d'etre to crank up a 6-1, or 12-1 portfolio in Tokyo. This is just lipstick on the Japanese momentum pig.

Pyramid Scheme

"Corrrrr......Blimey DM! $30,000,000,000 to $50,000,000,000  $40,000,000,000 to $70,000,000,000 ?!??!!!!" That's what some were estimating the Mubarak family has smashed-n-grabbed (and pilfered and extracted) from three decades as errr.... ummm...Beach King in the land of the Pyramids.

That seems like a lot of zeros, at least in comparison to Ben Ali (and his wife's family) who are reputed to have walked off with $3,000,000,000 to $5,000,000,000, though they are comparable on a per capita basis insofar as  Egypt's 85mm population is roughly proportional to Tunisia's 10mm inhabitants.

Russia's kleptocrats, by the same measure, seem positively munificent in their relative financial benevolence, even without eye-poppingly large round estimates.

Keeping consistent with comparisons, the piggiest, however, seems to be the recently deposed Dr Ewart Brown of Bermuda, who according to critics is reputed to have extracted some $300,000,000 to $500,000,000 on a lilliputian population base of a mere 60,000 island folk. This is approximately $6,000 per head taking a modest midpoint, versus the Mubarak clan's almost $600 per head or Ben Ali's more modest $400 per head "contribution" (on similar midpoints).

In all fairness, Bermuda's 2008 GDP per capita was an eye-popping world-beater at $94,000, making their contribution to Dr Brown's retirement fund (should he survive an almost certain imminent audit) a mere annoyance at 6.3%, not far off US State sales tax levy.  Ben Ali's was a more substantial 10% tariff, not even half of the Egyptian leader's near 22% of GDP per capita. Of course one might counter that the former army officer toiled long and hard (or long anyway) for more than 30 years picking up those wads of large notes along the way to presumably stash in UBP where his daughter serves on the Board, though few of his opponents would cite longevity as one of his virtues. Finally, when one considers that the size of the average Egyptian household is substantially larger than the average Bermudian one, the size of his take per household appears even more egregious in relation to per capita GDP. And we roll our eyes at Mssr's Clinton and Blair's multi-zeros bouquet per speaking engagement!!

Pyramid scheme indeed!!

Bare Ruined Choirs

OK, it's not THAT bad (cotton is at 1.74lb!!). Day-job. Family obligations. An occasional hard night of drinking. Etcetera. More importantly, little perspective to add that is worthy of the volume required to rise above the ambient noise and chatter of those extrapolating yesterday's trends into tomorrow. Yet the fact remains that eleven of my last fourteen posts remain in draft form. Stillborn. Aborted satirical foetuses.  Wonder what W.P. Mayhew would think of that? If you need me, I'll be at"the Earle"...

Farewell A&P...

So, farewell then

Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co.

(a.k.a. A&P. Waldbaum's, Pathmark,

The Food Emporium, SuperFresh

and 

Food Basics).

Some would say 

that you were caught 

between 

a rock

and 

a hard place.

Others might 

suggest that

you were

just a hard rock

when you needed 

to be 

otherwise.

My five year-old self

fondly remembers 

eating cookies from 

open packages 

on the shelves of your

Confectionary 

Aisle...

But I doubt 

you will truly be missed -

except 

by 

your landlords

and 

creditors.

(With apologies to EJ Thribb aged 110, and Private Eye)

Gifts For Someone With (Almost) Everything

It's that time of year when loved ones buy loved ones that special gift...or, for the unlucky and ill-planned, whatever is left on the shelf. But buying gifts for the titans of finance, the men (and a few women) with almost everything (except a sense of thrift) is never easy. Enlightening books are likely to remain unread by the singularly-driven, whereas more thoughtful tokens such as a poem, one's favorite pressed wildflowers, a short story, or indeed a humorous or poignant blog post are likely to remain under-appreciated. Despair not, however. At least for those UK-based gift-seekers, yours truly has searched high and low (surely "low and high" -ed.) and acquired for re-sale, a selection of number plates assured to be highly prized by the large minds of finance for their Astons and Carrera's alike. Note: these are NOT garish easy-to-source personalized plates, but actually-issued specimens, randomly assigned in the course of issuance - serendipity that should make them all the more valued.   

Bids start at GBP10,000....

B0N U5E5

UG3 F33S

R15K 0NN

A11 B3TA 

G0T CH4

S3LL V0L

I1UV HFT

QE15 3NUF

B1G 5H0RT

AU5 O0OO

N0N D0M1

B41L 0UT

I4M HFM1

GR3 3DY 

Z3R0 T4X

EZ3 M0NY

K4B 0OM

Sinkhole

I have always been socially liberal and fiscally conservative. Not to the extreme in the sense insofar as I take no issues with debt raised for long-term investment be it education, R&D, trains, Chunnels, or the like, things likely to maintain value and use for many years, and which yield externalities that are in the Public Interest. Nor do I find fault with a bit of counter-cyclical intervention now and then. However, I take issue with credit as a seeming birth-right, and believe that pricing credit too low is more often than not, as dangerous and ultimately dislocating as setting the price of credit too high. I am on record as such for a rather "extended period" (in Fed speak). After all, I am a saver, so it is natural to desire one's savings afforded protection in real terms.

I say these things because in the process of the following provocation, I do not wish to be categorized as a perma-anything, excepting perhaps a perma-skeptic, but in particular do not wish to be labeled an apologist for overly loose money - something that would be patently false.

I must further admit in order to insure the proper stamping of my anti-easy-money-credentials that I am as concerned as anyone about the concept of quantitative easing. I understand that it can be seen as dilution. And in many circumstances - certainly historic ones, printing was hazardous.

But here, today, being inquisitive and hopefully provocative, I must ask the frank question, what is the big deal about a bit of quantitative easing under the present circumstances? Hear me out. Look back over the past 25 years . Witness the ballooning of asset prices. The credit that has been extended and therefore money created, has been, in a single word, enourmous. No, actually ENOURMOUS!! I do not need to reproduce all the graphs that luridly depict this vertiginous reality. And they [asset prices] are still high, as any owner Schiller-measure, or owner of an inner London 2br flat can testify to. This money has already been created. And not only has it been created, it has been spent. And the cascade effects too have already spilled over and paid for the beneficiaries' Porsches, and Hampton or Nantucket digs. Yes, these asset prices and the S&P 500, might continue to go higher. But credit is and will likely remain constrained for a long time. Deleveraging continues apace. Asset prices - both real estate and equity remain elevated, and could easily compress a great deal more under the continuing scenario of limited credit, limited domestic investment opportunities, diminishing construction and consumption spending as a percentage of GDP, aging populations, high and long-term rising energy prices and the perception of the fiscally-constrained state.

Now focus on Japan. Here, too, witness the slow inexorable grind of rates lower during, yes, twenty-five years. The aging of the population. The rising ratio of national debt to GDP. The falling asset prices. No matter quantitative easing. The conjured liquidity seemingly disappears into one black-hole after another, unable to have any meaningful priapic impact upon velocity of money, asset prices, inflation or economic activity. These are vivid images, but accurate depictions. And why? It is not clear we even know.

Lets look at some numbers on our turf. Not the real precise numbers because I am lazy and in a rush for you to contemplate my point before hurling insults back at me, but rough back-of-envelope numbers will do for illustrative purposes. US GDP is $14 trillion. Equities have quadrupled over twenty years. US public market aggregate Market Cap is, I don't know $14 trillion? And private unlisted values - maybe quarter to half as much again? US Bond Market values - combined Federal, corporate, mortgage, municipal, are probably close enough to $30 Trillion, and who knows what the size of privately extended loans are on US bank balance sheets, but it must be a couple of trillion. Net real estate equity value - the unencumbered portion NOT accounted for in market cap of listed and private companies, must be several trillion. These values reflect money already out there. Asset values that already inflated by the massive credit binge during more optimistic times. These, like Japan, are likely compressing in a very long term move. The aggregate net worth of $40, $50 maybe $60 trillion, could be compressing to $30, $40 and $50 trillion respectively. Or, like Japan, lower, and over a longer period. So, one trillion of QE has no bearing on anything (unless you are the guy who has sold them duff assets for real money that you can transform quite easily into a large edible Philadelphia Hoagie. For more or less the same price as one transformed it ten years ago. Would two trillion do anything? In the scheme of things, it would seem, probably not. Oh, sure it might get the speculative juices flowing for a nanosecond (as it did in intermitant intervals in Japan) when traders attempt to front-run this government stimulus package, special budget, or the much vaunted QE, but this would turn out to be but a small blip in velocity, as it flatlined, seemingly forever, or beyond the patience of any reasonable trader or even long-term investor.

So this must be good news, and you now think me an optimist, right? Well, if you recall, virtually all Japan's largest banks needed recapitalisations by ten years after-the-fact. As did the finance companies, and the brokers, and many life insurers. Some needed several and some still need them, twenty-five years later as the inexorable deterioration in asset quality and repayment was eventually reflected in diminished asset prices which was eventually reflected in capital conjurations by pen-stroke, to insure systemic "solvency". Quantitative easing? This was like throwing a few pebbles into a gigantic sinkhole, hoping eventually to fill it in. Inflationary fears? Yes. Inflation? Not in anything subject to Peak Credit and the overhang, like home prices, the S&P, or the wages you pay your secretary. At least that was the experience in Japan. Where did it all go? Why does it not, to this day, make people hyperbolic in their vilification of authorities who have, to the objective observer with no preconceptions about how large the BoJ's balance sheet should be, preserved a semblance of normality in what otherwise have been something else. Maybe that something else is preferred. Maybe that something would have been better. Tea-party-ers and inflationista's certainly seem to think so. Maybe Japanese asset prices are falling for other reasons, and our asset prices are different. Better. They will respond because, ummm, because they are American. Perhaps, but only if they were in aggregate NOT overrvalued by $10 or $15 trillion or some other equally large (or larger) number. I am not sure I would want to make the case that outlying commuter suburbs with no reasonable public transport links are fairly valued in an era of peak oil. What IS the right price? Who knows, but where is fat tail? Seems like the left side - before the right side, at least before desperation sets in, and a trillion here or there is hardly desperation in the grand scheme of market values. Is this better or worse than inflation? I do not really know...

Dear Mr Cameron

The Rt Hon Mr David Cameron
Downing Street
London SW1
UNITED KINGDOM
28 October, 2010


Dear Mr Prime Minister

Quite the performance during Question Time yesterday. Such Passion! Such Fire! Such Resolve!
You have started to make the most significant contribution of any politician in a generation (possibly two) to the cause of Austerity as a requisite cleanser for the moldy undergrowth of entitlement, mindless bureaucratic inertia, waste, and indolence, some would argue is necessary to prepare the land for sounder more robust growth than the Thatcherite assault on The Public Interest and new-labour's smoke-and-mirror attempt at wallpapering prosperity over cracked walls that rather obviously required sounder work and treatment than PFIs and Privatisations. I applaud your efforts which have exceeded any expectation. The British people are stoic and in the main understand and support your efforts, which I expect will kindle a similar flame across our boated peers.

Yet, I would highlight to you that the stoicism is not unlimited, and that your efforts will generally supported, have neither been implemented and felt, nor have the rippled through the chain of dependancies that will surely see the economy shrink by several percent as they are felt. My point is that you, and so your austerity and reforms, are vulnerable to the criticism of unfairness. While the working and middle class is, and will greatly impacted, mostly through unemployment, The Rich have only seen small rise in the marginal tax rate, a means-testing of benefit here or there, a tax on banks as payment for insurance backstop. You have left yourself vulnberable with little valid riposte when the moment occurs.

The stoicism is based upon shared pain, and with it, still disspipate. Since the pain is likely to persist, you do I will suggest need to share it more evenly, for both appearances and to legitimately justify fairness of truly shared pain inherent in national austerity. You have tapped VAT, income tax, fuel and sin taxes. There is little more to gain here. But the number of Swiss registered and number-plated supercars roaming Chelsea of Swiss-forfaited super-rich is significant. There remains great injustice and unfairness in walking through Chelsea past the gated mini-palaces in which uber-rich reside for their maximum days, yet paying little in comparison the benefit of maintaining their business, their lifestyle, and the protection of their property-rights from the great unwashed, no to mention the superior road-paving, rubbish collection, policing, and other fringe benefits for which they do materially contribute.

Yes, the time has come to raise property taxes - less as a means to revenue generation than as a means to showing the soon-to-unemployed that you are serious about fairness and burden-sharing. And do it in a progressive fashion, since in many cases it is the only means by which one my capture the flag from loop-hole dodging owners (many of whom I might point out are indeed non-voting foreigners). It probably will not raise a lot of revenue - though it will raise some. And you can let property-rich, cash poor grannies have exemptions if that is important to your constituency. But proceed you must, for without fairness, when the austerity shit hits the proverbial fan, your stoic supporters will soon be organizing lynch-mobs for your party ack-benchers who supported what will be seen as draconian recession-inducing reforms.

It is the time to call upon YOUR party faithful to make the sacrifices that the average brit will be forced to suck up. It would be such a shame to squander a truly amazing start, and significant public support for fear of a backlash amongst our constituents. They surely will understand if you explain if the vernacular of shared pain.

Good night and good luck!

Respectfully,

Cassandra

Chelsea is Dead! or Why I Hate Urban Outfitters

URBN has over the years been both a personal boon and bane. This City of Brotherly Love-originated retailed founded by selling incense, bongs, dope-leaf tee-shorts and ultra-cheap imported bohemian stuff to skint college students has been loved (nearly to death) by growth investors and momo humpers alike. For the reversion-oriented plunger this affection of seeming endless relative outperformance on the way up, coupled with short-covering during risk-off regimes is the proverbial Scylla and Charybdis to one trying to make a buck on the short side. Fortunately, capitulation eventually occurs and patience is rewarded with outsized lumpy returns.

Frustrating as this has been over the years for a skeptic who refuses to buy-in to the growth forever mantra of this slick schlock retailer, today, I hate Urban Outfitter for another, more significant reason. For this morning I went to visit the venerable Chelsea landmark known as the Chelsea Antiques Market where stalls run by passionate niche specialists from antiquarian books to art-deco cut crystal formed a charming maze in the heart of the Kings Road. So one can imagine my disappointment to arrive there morning in search of an overdue wedding gift for a dear friend only to discover that it along with all its old-world charm has been completely and totally obliterated in favor of a gi-normous URBN "Lifestyle" subsidiary Anthropologie store one blindingly bright, filled to the brim with shite. I stood for a moment in horror, thinking of all the cappucino's drunk at a friends Cafe which [formerly] dwelled within before I cried.

This must be the the final nail in the coffin called Chelsea...a now souless vapid pit-of-a-bedroom-community devoid of one of it's few remaining tethers to humanity. RIP Chelsea...and F@#k Y*@ Urban Outfitters

Time Standing Still

Serendipity took my family and I to our nation's capital city,Washington, DC, ostensibly for a family holiday. My son was taken by the shiny metal and technology of the Air & Space center, while my daughters preferred the Smithsonian Natural History museum. I was keen too, since although I had spent reasonable amounts of time in DC with friends who worked the political circuit, I'd never actually been a tourist. So I was quite excited to visit the ground-zero of politics: The Capitol.

While I'd always been deeply interested in politics, an overtly political career never appealed. I skirted it via academia and applied research, my studies in economics, and philosophy, but had little lacked the convitction, missionary zeal for bottom-up activism. For every time I thought I knew for certain what was what, I would without faily later  discover how much I didn't know. This is not to fault those with vision, or those fighting for causes with obvious benefit for the public interest, though I remain suspect of those with too much zeal on issues where the ratio of concentrated parochial gain is large in comparison to that of the public interest.

With a tour arranged via the internet booking system - one that worked well enough to temporarily silence critics of governement ineptitude, we set out. I had few preconceptions of what to expect insude the halls of the Capitol, outside the idealized images  remaining from civics class, which had somehow displaced the more realistic and sordid images of K-Street lobbyists at their most insidious. I did imagine that we would be met by a knowledgeable guide, who would focus their considerable enthusiasm and proximity to power to enlighten the visiting public about the political process as it is - even if sugar-coated.

Once past security, our guide began their show. Yes they annoyingly spoke to us as if we were idiots. Mind-numbing detail about the physical building, the statues, the paintings, the cornice work - everything EXCEPT politics. Amazing. Here we were in the center - and everything was form, not function. Perhaps I was unrealistic in my expectations. No visit to committee rooms. No view of the big chambers despite the absence of congressional sessions.  No descriptions of torture methods employed by whips tto tame party rebels. Nothing of what makes Washington Washington.

Two images stuck in my mind. The first was a lunch visit to the Longworth Office building which houses offices of members of the House. Somehow (wrongly) I imagined (or wished) our leaders and their staff more elightened, but what I witnessed in the cafetaria was perhaps unsurprisingly a reflection of the nation: fried chicken, hamburgers, slathered in ketchup or mayonaise accompanied by a 20oz bucket of Coca-Cola. No wonder healthcare costs are 18% of GDP for non-universal coverage. Sure there was lip service to healthier food, but these lines were short to non-existant in comparison to the fried wings, french fries, ribs, and the like. No wonder logic and pragmatism seems unable to assert itself and unseat parochial interest. How can lawmakers and their staff - nourished as such, fight the focus their better nourished lobbysists.

The second was that while civic and administrative life in Washington itself seems to function beautifully  - transport, cleanliness, gentrification, zoning, sufficiently so to challenge the convention wisdom of administrative ineptitude, I couldn't help but notice that in the Capitol building itself, two of the three large ornate clocks were broken - freezing time. And I couldn't help thinking just how emblematic this is of American politics. A bold experiment in its time, now ossified, incapable of introspection, or evolvultion beyond the prevailing sad state of wholesale capture by those who can. On the lower floor, beneath the rotunda sits the exhibit I was expecting from the tour itself. A history of laws, documents displays of important laws enacted in our nations history along with the embellishing colour to ehance one's understanding. But like the broken timepieces, this proud timeline of legislation - from emancipation, womens, suffrage through to civil and social rights  - trails off dramatically as we approach the 21st century with increasingly abusurdly-named acts like "The No Child Left Behind Act" or insubstantive focus like steroid-use in professional sports, or banning assault weapons from public schools. The US must surely be alone amongst advanced nations in misusing the people's resources for such legislative folly. Where are the adults. Who will fix the clock, so the important matters of State facing our nation can be tackled and discussed pragmatically as citizens who share a common nation and common reality, rather than as two species inhabiting entirely separate realities - one characterized by Murdochian Fox, and the other resembling some L. Frank Baum inspired Land of Oz, where the responsibility is wholly-separated from the individual.

This may sound jaded and harsh, and unfairly focused upon what I wanted to see. Yet the problems facing this nation require a pragmatism -  free from dogma - such as we've rarely seen for many decades. And not just at the Federal level, but at the State and municipal level too. And if we were as a people, the least bit curious and introspective, we would see other nations and people that are already wrestling with the issues we face, challenging the parochial interests to re-examine what we've promised and what is feasible, what is desirable. Even hear, other nations seem farther on the road to viewing the world of the possible and plausible through similar eyes. I can nly hope we fix the clocks, and begin to approach the problems through a common reality.

DGDF? TGIF...

ADAD. QE..QEII? IITM. YAFIYGI. EMRTW, RT? YSIC? FUBAR? UR POV - RGO LY TIPS AU CRB JPY CHF BRICS?  UTM...DGDF FTASB?!? OMFG ONNTA. LMK SOL? IBTD. KYPO, TSP AWTTW: PDQ AFAHMASP, JMO!  TGIF! BYOB. G2G POAHF  (LOL) EOM

Who Needs PM's Anyway?

The money-management business has indeed changed. One would be forgiven for wondering whether it even has anything at all to do with investment. While I have suspected such for a long time from mere observation of the long-only world, it was confirmed, again, today from an Advent Software Press release that I came across:

About Advent Portfolio Exchange(R) Advent Portfolio Exchange(R) (APX) is an end-to-end portfolio management solution that integrates the front-office functions of prospecting, marketing, and customer relationship management with the back-office operations of portfolio accounting and reporting.

Yes it's official: Portfolio Management, not only doesn't rate as "Front-Office", but seemingly has no place in Advent's Characterization of the Investment Management organization - strange for a company dependent upon a continuation of errrr ummm investment. Revenge of the organizational bureaucracy indeed!

Please Don't Eat The Daisies

Like Doris Day, Carlson Capital's name is sprinkled with alliteration. And like her role referenced above, and the bucolic burbs of its setting, so Carlson Capital was caught and censured for disturbing otherwise calm waters, by violating Rule-105 - a polite reference to the rule prohibiting the practice of pounding secondaries before, and or into pricing, and covering (typically) via the offer . It goes without saying that (as was the case the GLG) it is obviously not permitted to pound the shares of an issuer (of equity, or equity-linked debt) PRIOR to the public announcement of the issue. Some would argue the former is OK because the practice is not without risk: shares hammered beyond management's pain threshold can always be pulled by the issuer leading to mother-of-a-squeeze, or or the perp of the low-risk arb could be denied stock by the syndicate forcing it to cover higher.

And politely, the SEC and its enforcers found Carlson culpable despite their protestations that the offending transactions (and presumably their covering counterpart) were initiated by separate portfolio managers, running independent portfolios. Admittedly, the WFC transgression (which was involved in a deal)  could have been bad luck. But just typing this justification made me smile. And then laugh. And thinking about it causes me to chuckle further. As an excuse, this falls into to pathetic "My Dog Ate My Homework", or "I Was Kidnapped and Violated By Aliens" categories of plausibility. Is there not another category of censure (and fine?) that says: "You broke the rules, and you were caught, but your attempt at a defense and subsequent justification is sooooo lame (and ridiculuous) that we will automatically multiply it by 10". If there isn't, there should be. Legally, this may not be defensible, or consistent, but the threat of such not-so-arbitrary enlargement might help put an end to Americans predilection for attempting to evade culpability for anything and everything - even when caught red-handed.

Indeed, their defense would have us believe that on the cited occasions one desk decides to drop big chunks of stock of the soon-to-be-issuing company, and then, completely independently there is another guy, whose strategy arrives at the decision to place orders from the secondary's underwriters for similar amounts of stock.  And this is in a reasonably small shop, with a central trading manager who is in the loop and presumably with advanced trading, middle-office and risk-management systems, Sure.

But it begs the question - is this an isolated incident (at CC and hedge funds generally), or is it exemplary of pervasive financial don't-ask--don't-tell, and that no omlette was ever made without breaking eggs? And if so, should we care? Actually, the question was rhetorical, and have no doubts that I think we should as these activities are zero sum, reflective of a real larceny probably from YOUR pension fund, and the reason it continues is because the spoils are concentrated, and losses widely diffused. So, 10x (or more), admission of guilt, even industry banishment might be a real and useful deterrent to such stealing.

Dog Days Revisited

And so venerable Ginza department store operator Matsuya (Code #8237) continues to revert (or, choose one: has reverted; will revert more; will overshoot) to some ltime-honoured level commensurate with some long-term market market-memory. It's present cap is just below YEN30 billion, which could just as easily be YEN20billion as it was during the millennial puke a decade ago, and little would change (except for the wealth of any levered specs still long of the stock). Though it must be said, this has been sympathetic with a malaise of similar magnitude amongst Japanese asset prices. Recently however, its decline somewhat oddly has taken on new vigour, particularly on market up-days. One might guess that  the remnants of its largest foreign holder are being puked to perhaps meet investor redemptions at the September quarter-end. So illiquid is the stock in comparison to the magnitude of their holding, even at their reduced levels, they need to start early and stomach (or rather subject their investors to) the resultant impact in order to meet obligations.

Long gone are the glorious thoughts of dismemberment, redevelopment, and pie-in-the-sky valuation estimates per tsubo. One wonders if they ever even met with management, and if so, how frosty and uncomfortable the timbre of such a tete-a-tete. Tumbleweeds like those from a Sergio Leone western, it would seem, will roll through Ginza before foreign carpetbaggers are rewarded for their efforts with a Mori Ark Hills-scale-project where specs are hoisted out of positions at large premia to their average acquisition prices.

At such times, it is worth contemplating the chastened hedge fund manager's options, having acquired illiquid positions earning incentive fees on the way up from self-impact, and now forced to liquidate into a near-vaccuum. He can act the fiduciary and attempt to obtain the best prevailing prices (which in any event are unlikely to be favorable to investors). He can say "fuck it" and just bang out positions without concern, justifying it with him (or herself) that since they are redeeming they deserve it, and anyway, he has acquired sufficient fuck-you money in the process to not care about being a fiduciary again. Or, and possibly this is the dark underbelly of interest conflicts, he could, knowing that the fund and business are "toast", really hammer the stock into the redemption date, and in some form, be it directly or indirectly, take the other side or collude with friends (with more capital) to take the lion's share of the other side at quite literally knock-down prices. The potential benefit is obvious since it is one of those moments when a manager has a true information asymmetry as he knows precisely "why" something is going down, and precisely "when" it will stop. This is not without risk, for  it may be the final ignominious descent to oblivion, Ginza jewel or not.

This may seem a cynical interpretation of possible realities. But they are worth pondering for allocating investors - particularly if one considers the lack of hesitancy by managers to exploit the asymmetries of incentive payments based on mark-to-market returns on the way up. The question is: Is there anything an allocator can do to minimize them? For one, prior to an investment, an investor (allocator) where the manager has or may have large illiquid positions in public market securities, one should demand the manager make explicit representations about actions to be taken in such eventualities, and guarantee to warehouse (and provide upon request) time&sales transaction activity. One can demand (in the Info Memo or by legal representation) blanket prohibition by the manager, its affiliates, its employees and their families, upon dealing in any securities in which the Fund has, or may have an interest in. This seems obvious, but it is rarely codified as such. This is applicable to all liquidity-constrained strategies. Anchor investors can (and should) further demand clawbacks where fees are paid on mark-to-market, or at the very least, non-disbursing fee accruals that float up and down until exit, or some suitably long investment horizon, effectively removing the traders' option. It would be wonderful to simply trust your manager. But jail, or threat of serious legal action under circumstance of contravention may be sufficient inducement to insure one's fiduciary remains, in fact, one's fiduciary.

ETFs For a Brave New World

ETFs clearly can provide some advantages for obtaining otherwise-expensive-to-obtain exposures for thematically-oriented investors. More noteworthy perhaps is the way that such vehicles have captured the imagination of Promoters and Managers as a salvation for otherwise stagnant revenue growth. This has lead to a proliferation of ever-more-focused ETFs to cater to the evolving fancies of investors looking for errrr... umm... something, indeed anything different. I would like to add my two-cents worth here and now, so BlackRock, take note: Here are some candidates for your marketing machine to focus on for the next decade:

Rent-Seeking ETF - While the maxim "Death and Taxes" is known to all, few realize that the original phrase was "Death, Taxes and Corruption". Indeed Companies that purchase influence, contracts, and favorable legislation/regulation are worthy of investor attention (not because they are more dynamic, which they aren't) but because they have a definable edge - something many others cannot boast about. Of course, ETF marketers would need to sanitize the pursuit into something like "Government Partnership Focused ETF" or

Gilded-Age ETF - Anyone who does their own shopping cannot ignore the the increasing gulf between winners and losers. As the a large portion of the former middle class sinks lower, a smaller but not reasonably-sized segment is promoted higher. This phenomena has meaningful effects ETF marketers can exploit as those companies focused upon the top-layer and growing underclass relatively prosper as the expense of the middle market. This ETF might have Whole Foods (WFMI) and Coach (COH) alongside pawnshops, check-cashing firms, pay-day loan enterprises and dollar discount stores.

Sin-City ETF - Booze, Cigarettes, Recre-ceuticals, Trans-Fats-In-A-Bag-To-Go, Espionage and surveillance equipment, Gambling, Porn, all in a neat little exchange-traded bundle. Reasonably recession-proof. High-profitability. Growing (except tobacco). Need I say more...?


Follow-The-Insider ETF - Alpha is getting harder to achieve these days. Covert insider-trading is getting riskier (just ask Raj!). But we know from some of the recent academic research that there is information contained in selective but systematically definable insider purchases and sales that yields abnormal excess returns. This is an easy one to flog, and panders to the twin pillar retail beliefs that "the market is rigged" and "it is nearly impossible for Average Joe to beat the market.

New Age ETF - Even tree-huggers have money to invest and would benefit from a convenient vehicle. And their numbers along with greater public awareness of what is environmentally good an bad, healthy or unhealthy, kharmically or spiritually desirable will make this a winner. The allure of this ETF is that it has many degrees of freedom in which to invest - from alternative energy, to agriculture and food science, from any company with sustainable approach to yoga-mat and acupuncture needle manufacturers. Build it (and advertise it convincingly) and they will come...

Bugger-The-Shorts ETF - This ETF, which will concentrate highly-shorted and crowded short stocks, may appeal to several classes of investor. First there are those that philosophically dislike the short side of the market - whether for moral or philosophical reasons. But there are also those devilish mischievous investors who can smell easy prey, and get sadistic pleasure out of squeezing weak (or system-driven) shorts out of their positions for fun and/or profit. This could potentially be popular with hedge funds as a way of quickly reversing exposure when they've been plunging themselves and find their positions on the wrong side of vicious pops so characteristic of bear-market rallies.

Activists Choice ETF - An ETF focusing on trumpted or reported positions disclosed by so-called activist investors are a so-called lay-up for ETF promoters. Primarily because activists themselves are such wonderful self-promoters, and quite adept at talking their own books. But also because they can tout "a hedge-fund strategy and performance without hedge fund fees" - always a winning slogan in the aggregation of retail funds.

Orlov's ETF - With an increasing number of doomsdayers crawling out from all crevices, under the svengali-like piping of Glenn Beck, subscribing to Dimitry Orlov-like visions of the future, perhaps an ETF focused on a belief in the coming unravelling would sell well. Manufacturers of home generators, self-sufficiency tools, small arms and ammo, micro-water-purification systems, drought-resistant seeds, land-mines and barbed-wire, as well as gold-miners, and private prison and security services all could have a place in this portfolio. The only draw back is the non-sequitir if investors peer too far into the future where property rights and the financial system dissolve into complete chaos...

The "US Healthcare System Is The Best" ETF - Americans have a peculiar love affair with their Health Care system, irrespective of how completely buggered it is in comparison to the rest of the civilized (and much of the recently civilizing) world for the insured (as well as the uninsured, and financiers of both). ETF promoters can exploit this inexplicably visceral love-affair by helping them put their money where their mouth is, and creating the market-traded basket that invests a portfolio of companies prospering from a continuation of US Healthcare haplessness.

Greying Demographics ETF - Another obvious marketing target with many degrees of investment freedom, that are increasingly visible to investors. Motorized buggies, time-shares, home-health monitoring, nutraceuticals, senior-assisted living, bingo and slot-machine manufacturers, all in a single portfolio.

The Two-Cent Nickel ETF - Americans can rarely resist a bargain. As America slides closer to Japanification, ETF marketers might take a page from the Japanese Investment Trust playbook which for years has sported The Hidden Asset Trust or similar fund focusing upon companies with net substantial real assets well below market values, particularly where such assets are not reflected on the books of the company at current market values. Some of these assets are land, subsidiaries, other securities that provide seductive teasers to bargain-hunting investors. Of course, they must be careful not to rely too heavily upon Japanese experience for performance comparisons.


Fund of Fund of Hedge Funds ETF - The Coup de Grace offering must be the Fund of Hedge Fund-of-Funds to give the punter access to the broadest participation of hedge funds, something the small-punter has arguably had difficulty in obtaining. And in an exchange traded vehicle where they can dump their exposure at the first sign of distress. The remarkable attribute of this ETF (from the industry's perspective) must be the multiple fee dollops that are removed from investors' investments on a monthly basis. This is truly the ETF Triple Dip straight from the in the Wall Street's finest creamery! But even better for the true skeptics, I know that you are thinking more like John Paulson, so if only someone (Hello GS!) can create for us a synthetic version of this that we can short, we too might find a good way to participate in the fee bonanza.

Of course, this is by no means an exhaustive list, as I am certain to have left some other crumbs on the table, so please feel free to submit your own additions.