Market Scheming

Sunday, April 24, 2011

Why China, not America, is in the economic driver’s seat

New Reality Slowly Setting In

It is no surprise that China’s political and economic power has increased dramatically over the last decade.  But what is surprising is the lack of recognition from governments and citizens of the western world that China wields substantial power during current negotiations.  This new reality can be seen from the United States Congress and the White House’s continued pressure for a faster Renminbi appreciation which has been effectively ignored by China.  The major reason for China’s delay is because many developing nations do not agree with the United States’ low interest policy.  Keeping interest rates at 0.25% has caused investors looking for a higher return to turn to developing nations for investment.  The huge inflows of capital are causing rampant inflationary pressures.  Needless to say, the United States government is not easily getting their way, since many would agree that the power lays with the creditor not the debtor.  Therefore United States’ attitude towards China (at least publicly) has a long way to go to catch up with the new economic reality. 

Largest Foreign Creditor: China

To save US economy from the brink in 2008, the United States government had to take unprecedented actions.  The five trillion dollar explosion of public debt from 2007 to 2010 was financed by the Fed as well as foreign creditors. China’s US treasury holdings have almost doubled to $750 billion since 2008, surpassing Japan as the largest holder of US debt.  In December the Federal Reserve past China as the largest holder of US treasuries as the FED’s balance sheet increased from approximated $800 billion in the middle of 2008 to over $2 trillion by the start of 2009 (Rosenbaum, 2010).  With the growing public debt not being addressed in the United States, China has expressed the need to diversify their foreign investments in other currency denominated assets (Reuters, 2011). 

Eurozone Support

As one of the major creditors of the world, China has been providing support to another important trade partner, the Eurozone. This initiative has helped diversify foreign reserves by purchased sovereign bonds from countries such as Greece, Portugal, and Spain.  Portugal and Spain had bond auctions on January 12th and 13th which went better than expected based on China continued commitment to help stabilize the region (Narioka, 2011).  Prior to the auctions, Japan also has pledged to support the Eurozone by purchasing European Central Bank notes that are raising capital for the European Union’s financial-aid fund.

What happens if Renminbi is adjusted?

Is the Renminbi undervalued? If so, by how much? Is China manipulating the Renminbi? Is the Fed manipulating the USD through quantitative easing measures? Who is right and who is wrong?  These questions are going to be avoided since there are many arguments from around the globe in support and defense of every position one could take.  Therefore, a hypothetical thought experiment is proposed.  Suppose the Renminbi is 10% undervalued, and considering that Tim Geithner, the U.S. Treasury Secretary, has recently stated that the Renminbi is “substantially undervalued”, this estimate is reasonable (Katz, 2011).
What are the implications of an adjustment?  From the United States government’s perspective, an adjustment will make Chinese exports more expensive on the world markets and therefore increase competitiveness of the United States’ export sector.  This would in turn increase jobs in the United States which have scarcely recovered since the 2008 downturn.  This linkage between an undervalued Renminbi and unemployment rate in the United States has been exploited by Government officials and media which has lead to a rise in anti-China sentiment.  There is little discussion surrounding the ramifications of an appreciated Renminbi; remember in economics there is always a trade off. 

What Manufacturing Base?

The US employment in the manufacturing sector is at 1950’s levels (St Louis Fed, 2009).  Most multinationals left the United States in search for lower manufacturing costs in the developing world. Since the 2000 almost five million jobs have be lost in this sector.  How long will it take the United States economy to recapture manufacturing investment and train new workers?  The expectation of quick and dramatic increase of employment after the Renminbi peg is lifted has greatly been overstated.  This is not to say that an increase in jobs will not occur, but it will take years for investment in factories to translate into a sustainable job growth. 

 

No Such Thing as a Free Lunch

The less desired implication of a reevaluation is simply inflation.  Basing this analysis on the assumption of a 10% undervalued Renminbi, the purchasing power of Americans with respect to China will decrease by 10%.  Take the world’s largest retailer as an example; Wal-Mart imports the majority of goods from China.  This in turn allows the Americans to purchase inexpensive goods as a direct result of China undervalued Renminbi.  A 10% increase in prices at local Wal-Mart stores will adversely affect the already struggling low and middle class.  Considering the fact that over 14% of all Americas are currently enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (aka food stamps), this inflationary pressure will have dire consequences for the majority of the population (Food and Nutrition Services, 2011).  This inflationary pressure will be felt also in Canada as price increases will occur for all imported Chinese products.  It should be now clear why this side of the story is much less communicated, as it would result in awareness of the true cost of a Renminbi reevaluation.





Works Cited

Food and Nutrition Services. (2011, January 5). SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: NUMBER OF PERSONS PARTICIPATING. Retrieved January 14, 2011, from SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION ASSISTANCE PROGRAM: http://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/29SNAPcurrPP.htm
Katz, I. (2011, January 13). Geithner Says China Must Boost ‘Undervalued’ Yuan. Retrieved January 15, 2011, from Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-12/geithner-says-china-must-move-to-prop-up-substantially-undervalued-yuan.html
Narioka, K. (2011, January 13). Euro Falls Against Dollar And Yen; Spain Auction Eyed. Retrieved January 14, 2011, from Wall Street Journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20110113-700301.html
Reuters. (2011, January 9). Central banker urges China to cut U.S. debt holdings: report. Retrieved January 15, 2011, from Reuters: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE7090W120110110
Rosenbaum, E. (2010, December 15). Fed Surpasses China in Treasury Binge. Retrieved January 14, 2011, from The Street: http://www.thestreet.com/story/10948075/fed-now-the-largest-holder-of-us-debt.html
St Louis Fed. (2009). Graph: Employees on Nonfarm Payrolls: Manufacturing (MANEMP). Retrieved January 15, 2011, from St Louis Fed: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?s[1][id]=MANEMP

Digital Copy of Original Print:


Wednesday, April 20, 2011

Confirmation that GPR.TO is undervalued relative to other mining companies

GPR.TO ( Great Panther Silver ) has been followed on this blog for a while, and recently there has been an interesting development within this stock.


This massive triangle that began at the start of April. I would like to make a case of a break out of the triangle which will lead to a substantial gain in GPR.TO.  This gain may overshoot true valuation and have a pull back but I am expecting at least a 10% move.

Complicating this situation was the announcement of a $24 million Bought Deal which closed on April 12th, but was announced March 24th.  When this was announced, the stock quickly advanced to around 4.80 an all time high for this stock.  However, this began this triangle to find the true value of this stock.  The key here is, on April 12th, the underwriters instantly exercised the over-allotment option.  The stock price this bought deal was executed at was $4.20.

"We are very pleased with the strong investor support for the Company as evidenced by the over-subscription," said Robert Archer, President & CEO.

My last part of this case that this stock should at least be over the $4.20 mark comes from some analysis of three mining companies: GPR.TO (Great Panther Silver), FVI.TO (Fortuna Silver), AXR.TO (Alexco Resources).

Using a Canadian Silver ETF (HUZ.TO) to describe price movements in silver this graph shows that a convergence between the HUZ.TO and GPR.TO is likely.  Compared to all other mining companies GPR.TO has not kept up with the silver moves.  The right hand axis is the scale for Silver and the left hand axis is the scale for the mining companies.


Also some historical correlations from January 1st, 2010 to April 19th, 20th

Correlation GPR<->HUZ    0.610178314
Correlation GPR<->TSX    0.404853301
Correlation FVI<->HUZ    0.51851121
Correlation FVI<->TSX    0.416605769
Correlation AXR<->HUZ    0.559390905
Correlation AXR<->TSX    0.442104414
Correlation HUZ<->TSX    0.512571887

GPR.TO has the highest correlation with HUZ.TO, however in the past 10-20 days this correlation has broken down.  I expect that when investors have a signal that this stock is about to move, the move will be fast and furious, barring any collapse in silver.