Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
durhamborn

Deflationary collapse and the Reflation Cycle to Come.

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Errol said:

Thanks for putting this up Errol.I've read him before when you've posted his stuff.

Interesting that he says

' The homebuilders are already in a bear market, like the one that started in mid-2005 in the same stocks about 18 months before the stock market started heading south in 2007. My Short Seller’s Journal subscribers and I are raking in a small fortune shorting and buying puts on homebuilder stocks. As an example, I recommended shorting Hovnanian (HOV) at $2.88 in early January. It’s trading at $1.78 as I write this – a 38.2% ROR in 4 months. Anyone get that with AMZN in the last 4 months? You can learn more about the SSJ here: Short Seller’s Journal. '

 

Very much coincides with my view on Uk building stocks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As previously discussed on here, Powell's tenure at the Fed is a real departure from those who've perceded him.Here's a guy whom isn't imprisoned by the Neo Classical constraints of his forebears.

Not only has the cost/benefit been realistically assessed,but they clearly quwation whether the Fed is creating a moral hazard intervening in the MBS markets/Corporate credit markets

Interesting times.If ten year yields rise,I'm not sure Powell is going to mind.

https://wolfstreet.com/2018/05/16/will-the-new-fed-shed-all-its-mortgage-backed-securities-that-seems-to-be-the-plan/

'Will the New Fed Get Rid of All its Mortgage-Backed Securities? That Seems to be the Plan

by Wolf Richter • May 16, 2018 • 42 Comments

The Fed shouldn’t be getting into “allocating credit.”

Chairman Jerome Powell is a lawyer, not an economist. So for balance, the vice chair is going to be a tried-and-true economist. Clarida fits the bill. But when he testified before the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday, his views seemed to be a mirror image of Powell’s views. And that’s why what Clarida said about mortgage-backed securities on the Fed’s balance sheet is so interesting – even if he doesn’t make it through the Senate confirmation process – because it likely shows the direction of Powell’s thinking as well.

First things first. Like Powell, Clarida said he “absolutely” supports the Fed’s normalization of interest rates and the balance sheet. Like Powell, he said that the normalized balance sheet should be “a lot smaller,” and that Powell’s suggestion of a range of $2.4 trillion to $2.9 trillion, down from its peak-level of $4.5 trillion, “makes sense.”

Like Powell, he said stock market volatility itself – that’s downward volatility, the only volatility that matters on Wall Street – shouldn’t determine the Fed’s policy decisions. On banking regulation too he mirrored Powell.

So in this sense, what he said about mortgage-backed securities on the Fed’s balance sheet is fascinating: The Fed should shed them entirely, down to zero.

Clarida explained that there are “benefits and costs” of QE, and that as more layers of QE were piled on, “the benefits of QE diminished and the costs went up.” And as vice chairman, he’d “have to take a serious look at the costs of QE.”

Then he was asked about “non-Treasury instruments, like mortgage-backed securities,” for QE – that the Fed, when selecting non-Treasury securities, would be getting into something that it shouldn’t, namely “allocating credit.”

“Yes, absolutely,” Clarida replied: “My preference would be for the Fed to end up with a Treasury-only portfolio.”

He then added that, “as a general proposition, my preference would be to have the balance sheet as much as possible in Treasury securities.”

Shedding MBS from the balance sheet entirely and keeping them off could have a big impact. Currently, the Fed holds $1.74 trillion of MBS. That’s about 26% of all residential mortgage-backed securities outstanding. The Fed is the elephant in the MBS room.

Over the years, given the magnitude, the Fed’s MBS purchases and holdings have been a big force in the mortgage market, helping to push down yields of residential MBS, and thereby helping to push down mortgage rates.

That Clarida is thinking about shedding them entirely appears to be unrelated to mortgage rates per se, and all about what types of decisions the Fed should stay out of – and in this case, that the Fed should stay out of “allocating credit,” which would give one type of private-sector bond a competitive advantage over other types that are not being selected.

This was perhaps also a veiled criticism of the ECB’s QE program, which very specifically and publicly is “allocating credit” by buying (in addition to government bonds) corporate bonds, asset-backed securities, and covered bonds. The individual corporate bonds the ECB has acquired can be viewed in its public data base. For a company, having its bonds acquired by the ECB is deemed a stamp of approval and has pushed the yields of those bonds, and thus the cost of borrowing, way down. In other words, the ECB decides on a daily basis that certain types of private-sector credits, such as bonds of specific companies, will get preferential treatment, and others will not.

Clarida seemed to be saying that the Fed shouldn’t get into these decisions of preferential treatment in the private sector, that at first it might be MBS, but then, like the ECB, the Fed might slither into other credits, such as corporate bonds. Hence, stick to Treasuries only. And given that he and Powell are on the same page on just about all other issues brought up, it’s likely that this view is shared as well.

The Treasury Department reported that foreign holdings of Treasury securities rose by $220 billion over the 12 months through March 31. Over the same period, the US gross national debt surged by $1.24 trillion. Japan systematically dumped US Treasuries while China hung on. So who bought those Treasuries? Read…  But Who the Heck Bought the $1.2 trillion in New US Debt Over the Past 12 Months? '

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sancho Panza said:

As previously discussed on here, Powell's tenure at the Fed is a real departure from those who've perceded him.Here'suy whom isn't imprisoned by the Neo Classical constraints of his forebears.

Not only has the cost/benefit been realistically assessed,but they clearly quwation whether the Fed is creating a moral hazard intervening in the MBS markets/Corporate credit markets

Interesting times.If ten year yields rise,I'm not sure Powell is going to mind.

https://wolfstreet.com/2018/05/16/will-the-new-fed-shed-all-its-mortgage-backed-securities-that-seems-to-be-the-plan/

'Will the New Fed Get Rid of All its Mortgage-Backed Securities? That Seems to be the Plan

by Wolf Richter • May 16, 2018 • 42 Comments

The Fed shouldn’t be getting into “allocating credit.”

Chairman Jerome Powell is a lawyer, not an economist. So for balance, the vice chair is going to be a tried-and-true economist. Clarida fits the bill. But when he testified before the Senate Banking Committee on Tuesday, his views seemed to be a mirror image of Powell’s views. And that’s why what Clarida said about mortgage-backed securities on the Fed’s balance sheet is so interesting – even if he doesn’t make it through the Senate confirmation process – because it likely shows the direction of Powell’s thinking as well.

First things first. Like Powell, Clarida said he “absolutely” supports the Fed’s normalization of interest rates and the balance sheet. Like Powell, he said that the normalized balance sheet should be “a lot smaller,” and that Powell’s suggestion of a range of $2.4 trillion to $2.9 trillion, down from its peak-level of $4.5 trillion, “makes sense.”

Like Powell, he said stock market volatility itself – that’s downward volatility, the only volatility that matters on Wall Street – shouldn’t determine the Fed’s policy decisions. On banking regulation too he mirrored Powell.

So in this sense, what he said about mortgage-backed securities on the Fed’s balance sheet is fascinating: The Fed should shed them entirely, down to zero.

Clarida explained that there are “benefits and costs” of QE, and that as more layers of QE were piled on, “the benefits of QE diminished and the costs went up.” And as vice chairman, he’d “have to take a serious look at the costs of QE.”

Then he was asked about “non-Treasury instruments, like mortgage-backed securities,” for QE – that the Fed, when selecting non-Treasury securities, would be getting into something that it shouldn’t, namely “allocating credit.”

“Yes, absolutely,” Clarida replied: “My preference would be for the Fed to end up with a Treasury-only portfolio.”

He then added that, “as a general proposition, my preference would be to have the balance sheet as much as possible in Treasury securities.”

Shedding MBS from the balance sheet entirely and keeping them off could have a big impact. Currently, the Fed holds $1.74 trillion of MBS. That’s about 26% of all residential mortgage-backed securities outstanding. The Fed is the elephant in the MBS room.

Over the years, given the magnitude, the Fed’s MBS purchases and holdings have been a big force in the mortgage market, helping to push down yields of residential MBS, and thereby helping to push down mortgage rates.

That Clarida is thinking about shedding them entirely appears to be unrelated to mortgage rates per se, and all about what types of decisions the Fed should stay out of – and in this case, that the Fed should stay out of “allocating credit,” which would give one type of private-sector bond a competitive advantage over other types that are not being selected.

This was perhaps also a veiled criticism of the ECB’s QE program, which very specifically and publicly is “allocating credit” by buying (in addition to government bonds) corporate bonds, asset-backed securities, and covered bonds. The individual corporate bonds the ECB has acquired can be viewed in its public data base. For a company, having its bonds acquired by the ECB is deemed a stamp of approval and has pushed the yields of those bonds, and thus the cost of borrowing, way down. In other words, the ECB decides on a daily basis that certain types of private-sector credits, such as bonds of specific companies, will get preferential treatment, and others will not.

Clarida seemed to be saying that the Fed shouldn’t get into these decisions of preferential treatment in the private sector, that at first it might be MBS, but then, like the ECB, the Fed might slither into other credits, such as corporate bonds. Hence, stick to Treasuries only. And given that he and Powell are on the same page on just about all other issues brought up, it’s likely that this view is shared as well.

The Treasury Department reported that foreign holdings of Treasury securities rose by $220 billion over the 12 months through March 31. Over the same period, the US gross national debt surged by $1.24 trillion. Japan systematically dumped US Treasuries while China hung on. So who bought those Treasuries? Read…  But Who the Heck Bought the $1.2 trillion in New US Debt Over the Past 12 Months? '

Anyone know who bought those treasuries. A fascinating post

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Sancho Panza said:

Thanks for putting this up Errol.I've read him before when you've posted his stuff.

Interesting that he says

' The homebuilders are already in a bear market, like the one that started in mid-2005 in the same stocks about 18 months before the stock market started heading south in 2007. My Short Seller’s Journal subscribers and I are raking in a small fortune shorting and buying puts on homebuilder stocks. As an example, I recommended shorting Hovnanian (HOV) at $2.88 in early January. It’s trading at $1.78 as I write this – a 38.2% ROR in 4 months. Anyone get that with AMZN in the last 4 months? You can learn more about the SSJ here: Short Seller’s Journal. '

 

Very much coincides with my view on Uk building stocks

I think house prices are now in their bear market.I track house builders average price (that shows when the top priced houses on developments are sticking) and they are turning down.The only way builders can increase profits from here is increase supply.HTB is the fly in ointment though,young people are jumping in with it and hanging themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, durhamborn said:

I think house prices are now in their bear market.I track house builders average price (that shows when the top priced houses on developments are sticking) and they are turning down.The only way builders can increase profits from here is increase supply.HTB is the fly in ointment though,young people are jumping in with it and hanging themselves.

From Wed:
 

Quote

 

Crest Nicholson has warned that its margins will be squeezed by flat house prices and rising business costs, prompting investors to send the housebuilder’s shares down 13pc.

The company said that, while it had enjoyed “strong growth in revenues and housing unit numbers in the first six months of 2018... generally flat pricing against a backdrop of continuing build cost inflation at 3-4pc will mean that operating margins for the full year are expected to be around 18pc”. That is at the bottom end of Crest Nicholson’s 18pc to 20pc guided range.

Average selling prices rose 5pc at £439,000 in the first half of the year and the housebuilder expects revenue growth of more than 15pc this year, with year-to-date completions already 11pc ahead of the same period last year.

The company said that sales at higher price points had proven “difficult to achieve”, which it said “reflects the greater interdependency of higher-value sales with transactions in the second-hand market, where activity has been more subdued and property chains have been taking longer to complete”.

The housebuilder expects that trend to continue, which it said would suppress prices and cause its margins to be flat.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/05/16/crest-nicholson-shares-slip-warns-margins/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Sancho Panza said:

 

Very much coincides with my view on Uk building stocks

Why are they building like crazy at the moment? Everywhere I go I see new builds going up. Do they already know bad times are coming and want to get rid of their land banks quickly? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whats peoples view on Vodafone over the last few days its been down dropped below £2 "Vodafone chief bows out after ‘remarkable transformation"

 

I know DYOR and have bought some over the past day or so 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, durhamborn said:

I think house prices are now in their bear market.I track house builders average price (that shows when the top priced houses on developments are sticking) and they are turning down.The only way builders can increase profits from here is increase supply.HTB is the fly in ointment though,young people are jumping in with it and hanging themselves.

Indeed, and the not-so-young. especially in the SE. It's easy for us to critique on here but most of them feel as though they have no other choice.

1 hour ago, Funn3r said:

Why are they building like crazy at the moment? Everywhere I go I see new builds going up. Do they already know bad times are coming and want to get rid of their land banks quickly? 

I imagine these things are planned so far in advance due to our insanely restrictive planning procedures that, despite economic forecasts, homebuilders (just like their HTB customers) are guilty of getting a little caught up in the good times. For those painfully holding off long term and continuing to fund landlord early retirement lifestyles (like me), this extra stock is most welcome.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet another article along the same lines as @durhamborn , looming liquidity crisis:

http://www.mauldineconomics.com/editorial/a-liquidity-crisis-of-biblical-proportions-is-upon-us/#

Quote

You see, it’s not just borrowers who’ve become accustomed to easy credit. Many lenders assume they can exit at a moment’s notice. One reason for the Great Recession was so many borrowers had sold short-term commercial paper to buy long-term assets.

Things got worse when they couldn’t roll over the debt and some are now doing exactly the same thing again, except in much riskier high-yield debt. We have two related problems here.

  • Corporate debt and especially high-yield debt issuance has exploded since 2009.
  • Tighter regulations discouraged banks from making markets in corporate and HY debt.

Both are problems but the second is worse. Experts tell me that Dodd-Frank requirements have reduced major bank market-making abilities by around 90%. For now, bond market liquidity is fine because hedge funds and other non-bank lenders have filled the gap.

The problem is they are not true market makers. Nothing requires them to hold inventory or buy when you want to sell. That means all the bids can “magically” disappear just when you need them most.

These “shadow banks” are not in the business of protecting your assets. They are worried about their own profits and those of their clients.

Gavekal’s Louis Gave wrote a fascinating article on this last week titled, “The Illusion of Liquidity and Its Consequences.” He pulled the numbers on corporate bond ETFs and compared them to the inventory trading desks were holding—a rough measure of liquidity.

Louis found dealer inventory is not remotely enough to accommodate the selling he expects as higher rates bite more.

We now have a corporate bond market that has roughly doubled in size while the willingness and ability of bond dealers to provide liquidity into a stressed market has fallen by more than -80%. At the same time, this market has a brand-new class of investors, who are likely to expect daily liquidity if and when market behavior turns sour. At the very least, it is clear that this is a very different corporate bond market and history-based financial models will most likely be found wanting.

Quote

Leverage, Leverage, Leverage

To make matters worse, many of these lenders are far more leveraged this time. They bought their corporate bonds with borrowed money, confident that low interest rates and defaults would keep risks manageable.

In fact, according to S&P Global Market Watch, 77% of corporate bonds that are leveraged are what’s known as “covenant-lite.” That means the borrower doesn’t have to repay by conventional means.

Somehow, lenders thought it was a good idea to buy those bonds. Maybe that made sense in good times. In bad times? It can precipitate a crisis. As the economy enters recession, many companies will lose their ability to service debt, especially now that the Fed is making it more expensive to roll over—as multiple trillions of dollars will need to do in the next few years.

Normally this would be the borrowers’ problem, but covenant-lite lenders took it on themselves.

The macroeconomic effects will spread even more widely. Companies that can’t service their debt have little choice but to shrink. They will do it via layoffs, reducing inventory and investment, or selling assets.

All those reduce growth and, if widespread enough, lead to recession.

Let’s look at this data and troubling chart from Bloomberg:

Companies will need to refinance an estimated $4 trillion of bonds over the next five years, about two-thirds of all their outstanding debt, according to Wells Fargo Securities. This has investors concerned because rising rates means it will cost more to pay for unprecedented amounts of borrowing, which could push balance sheets toward a tipping point. And on top of that, many see the economy slowing down at the same time the rollovers are peaking.

“If more of your cash flow is spent into servicing your debt and not trying to grow your company, that could, over time—if enough companies are doing that—lead to economic contraction,” said Zachary Chavis, a portfolio manager at Sage Advisory Services Ltd. in Austin, Texas. “A lot of people are worried that could happen in the next two years.”

 

Edited by Barnsey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, DoINeedOne said:

Whats peoples view on Vodafone over the last few days its been down dropped below £2 "Vodafone chief bows out after ‘remarkable transformation"

 

I know DYOR and have bought some over the past day or so 

Ex div date looming. I bought these a couple of months back for 191. In fact my very first shares purchase! I topped up today aswell. At this price it's gone into my HL Shares ISA for the long term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/05/2018 at 07:41, Talking Monkey said:

Anyone know who bought those treasuries. A fascinating post

https://wolfstreet.com/2018/05/16/but-who-the-heck-bought-the-1-2-trillion-in-new-us-debt-over-the-past-12-months/

'Here are the top holders of Treasuries, after China and Japan – many of them tax havens and alleged money laundering centers, and tiny countries or jurisdictions with inexplicably huge balances. For example, Ireland, which is in overall third position behind China and Japan, holds $318 billion of Treasuries, higher than its GDP ($304 billion in 2016).

  • Ireland: $318 billion
  • Brazil: $286 billion
  • United Kingdom (“City of London!”): $264 billion
  • Switzerland: $245 billion
  • Cayman Islands: $243 billion
  • Luxembourg: $222 billion
  • Hong Kong: $196 billion
  • Taiwan: $170 billion
  • India: $157 billion
  • Saudi Arabia: $151 billion
  • Belgium: $125 billion

Note that Germany, a country with a massive trade surplus with the US and the rest of the world, and the fourth largest economy in the world, only holds $76 billion in Treasuries.

In total, foreign holdings edged up by $2.3 billion In March, to $6.294 trillion. Over the past 12 months, these holdings gained $220 billion.

Over the same 12-month period through March 31, 2018, the US gross national debt surged by mind-boggling $1.24 trillion with a T to an even more mind-boggling $21.1 trillion. This is split in two ways:

  1. Debt held internally by US government entities has risen by $185 billion to $5.66 trillion
  2. Debt that is publicly traded has soared by $1.06 trillion to $15.4 trillion.

This publicly traded debt of $15.4 trillion is held by these entities:

  • 15.6% or $2.4 trillion by the Fed as part of its QE
  • 41.0% or $6.3 trillion by foreign official entities (see above).
  • 49.4% or $6.7 trillion by, well, mostly Americans, directly or indirectly.

It’s mostly Americans directly and indirectly, via bond funds pension funds, and other ways, along with some “unofficial” investors from other countries. For them, Treasuries have become more attractive as yields have now risen sharply – though they remain relatively low. These “risk free” Treasury yields from three month and up now even exceed the S&P 500 dividend yield, and they practically blow away the yields in the twisted NIRP regions of Europe and Japan. So that’s a deal. '

Edited by Sancho Panza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/05/2018 at 09:37, durhamborn said:

I think house prices are now in their bear market.I track house builders average price (that shows when the top priced houses on developments are sticking) and they are turning down.The only way builders can increase profits from here is increase supply.HTB is the fly in ointment though,young people are jumping in with it and hanging themselves.

I'm doing the bulk of my chart work at the minute on the UK housebuilders.

I think a good few are in the topping out process.And a good few have had an exponential rise over the last two years.Chart work is a highly individual thing and there are no set rules that guarantee successful trades in my expereince.That being said,they have incredible value and some combinations work incredibly well for some sectors.Some rules are timeless eg ' the more a resistance is tested the more likely it is to break'.

Building land moves at 3 times the rate of change to house prices,given prices appear to be on the verge of dropping,a lot of assets may not be worth what was paid in a year or two.

As I've stated previously,the builders dropped hard before Northern Rock in 2007,with Lehman,Bear,RBS,A&L,B&B going in 2008....

Intersting times will start if the builders break south imho.

 

Edit to add-LCP/LSL Acadata come out over the next two weeks,and the LCP data does include new builds which is where the action lies at the moment

 

Edited by Sancho Panza

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/05/2018 at 11:34, Barnsey said:

Yet another article along the same lines as @durhamborn , looming liquidity crisis:

http://www.mauldineconomics.com/editorial/a-liquidity-crisis-of-biblical-proportions-is-upon-us/#

 

The increasingly excellnet Wolf St-I'm virtually spamming it at the minute-has another good piece on movement at the margins in US credit card markets.Worth reading the whole thing.

https://wolfstreet.com/2018/05/18/credit-card-delinquencies-spike-past-financial-crisis-peak-at-smaller-us-banks/

'Credit Card Delinquencies Spike Past Financial-Crisis Peak at the 4,788 Smaller US Banks

by Wolf Richter • May 18, 2018 • 66 Comments

Subprime is calling.

In the first quarter, the delinquency rate on credit-card loan balances at commercial banks other than the largest 100 – so at the 4,788 smaller banks in the US – spiked in to 5.9%. This exceeds the peak during the Financial Crisis. The credit-card charge-off rate at these banks spiked to 8%. This is approaching the peak during the Financial Crisis.

A sobering set of numbers the Federal Reserve Board of Governors released this afternoon.

But the surge in charge-offs at these banks points at something fundamental: Credit problems at the margin. The consumer spending binge in recent years has been funded not by surging incomes at the lower 60% of the wage scale, where real wage stagnation has reigned, but by borrowing – particularly via credit cards and auto loans. Both of them have turned sour at the margins. And these are still the best of times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Sancho Panza said:

The increasingly excellnet Wolf St-I'm virtually spamming it at the minute-has another good piece on movement at the margins in US credit card markets.Worth reading the whole thing.

https://wolfstreet.com/2018/05/18/credit-card-delinquencies-spike-past-financial-crisis-peak-at-smaller-us-banks/

'Credit Card Delinquencies Spike Past Financial-Crisis Peak at the 4,788 Smaller US Banks

by Wolf Richter • May 18, 2018 • 66 Comments

Subprime is calling.

In the first quarter, the delinquency rate on credit-card loan balances at commercial banks other than the largest 100 – so at the 4,788 smaller banks in the US – spiked in to 5.9%. This exceeds the peak during the Financial Crisis. The credit-card charge-off rate at these banks spiked to 8%. This is approaching the peak during the Financial Crisis.

A sobering set of numbers the Federal Reserve Board of Governors released this afternoon.

But the surge in charge-offs at these banks points at something fundamental: Credit problems at the margin. The consumer spending binge in recent years has been funded not by surging incomes at the lower 60% of the wage scale, where real wage stagnation has reigned, but by borrowing – particularly via credit cards and auto loans. Both of them have turned sour at the margins. And these are still the best of times.

Sancho Panza-  watching the same site these days- agree that it’s increasingly juicy. Do you think bitcoin was a vehicle for Chinese money to exit their country and do you think international capital flows will flood to dollar assets when it all hits?

Edited by Thorn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Thorn said:

Sancho Panza-  watching the same site these days- agree that it’s increasingly juicy. Do you think bitcoin was a vehicle for Chinese money to exit their country and do you think international capital flows will flood to dollar assets when it all hits?

I have little understanding of Bticoin and the like.Hence I'd never trade it.

From what I understand,it's a decent mechanism to dodge capital controls etc.

I'm a $ bull for sure when it comes to the longer term.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Thorn said:

Sancho Panza-  watching the same site these days- agree that it’s increasingly juicy. Do you think bitcoin was a vehicle for Chinese money to exit their country and do you think international capital flows will flood to dollar assets when it all hits?

The simple answer is to hedge your bets and diversify. I have bitcoin (as well as other Crypto), yes it’s all mostly speculation. But Bitcoin and Monero are the two main currencies used on the dark web, so as these have a real world use (albeit mostly an immoral one), they have value. 

My gut feeling is when the time comes and countries are fleeing their currencies, Bitcoin will go stratospheric. I do believe that banks have bought enough now however to be able to manipulate the price of crypto, just like gold in a way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 18/05/2018 at 09:15, DoINeedOne said:

Whats peoples view on Vodafone over the last few days its been down dropped below £2 "Vodafone chief bows out after ‘remarkable transformation"

 

I know DYOR and have bought some over the past day or so 

Telcos are out of favour,and have been for a good while now.They have all invested heavily in their networks and some (BT) still will be for several years.This means debt has gone up and/or free cash flow has been swallowed up.As free cash is used for investment debts remain high/dividends look at risk.However once this investment falls and depreciation costs also fall free cash can explode higher.The debt has been borrowed at around 3%,Vodaphone even have some around 1.5%.In affect bond holders have financed the networks that in an inflation cycle will reward the equity while the bonds/debt is inflated away.A lot depends on if the telecos can push through inflation increases through the next cycle.If they can they are probably very very cheap.Of course the market worries that higher interest rates mean much higher re-finance costs,and that is true,however it is nothing compared to the increase in free cash from falling investment and increasing prices.

I bought Vod a while ago at £1.91 and i added a few BT last week,that was more a punt for the long term because i rate the Chairman very highly,even though they have a big problem with the pension scheme.DYOR and just my opinions etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

M&S announced 100 store closures there. That will change sentiment so much among the older generation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eldorado Gold had a good day up 16.8%

 

The main aim is to reach an agreement in the coming weeks within the spirit of the arbitration ruling – Stathakis as quoted by the Greek energy ministry. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, DoINeedOne said:

Eldorado Gold had a good day up 16.8%

 

The main aim is to reach an agreement in the coming weeks within the spirit of the arbitration ruling – Stathakis as quoted by the Greek energy ministry. 

It did. Lots of the miners are crawling up- First Majestic, Sibanye too. And Cameco is a bit of an odd one but interesting to see what will happen.

DB’s picks have been on the money. DYOR etc. but thanks again DB.

I want to figure out how to protect the gains from a crash. Not sure how to put rolling stops on HL SIPP.

I am now reading a really good book called The Long and The Short of It. John Kay. Really recommend it- puts a lot of concepts together for a novice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Thorn said:

 

I want to figure out how to protect the gains from a crash. Not sure how to put rolling stops on HL SIPP.

 

Best way to win is to cash out.

Stop losses wont work if a collapse comes, read the small print, the game is rigged.

If no one is buying, you cant sell.

Cash out, keep the cash or buy something physical is the only way to win if you are a little person

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 355 The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.