What could have happened?

October 23rd, 2008 by 8percentpa
The past few weeks actually went passed normally for most people NOT reading this blog. Common folks getting on with their daily lives, occasionally watching the news and see indices around the world fall 25% in one week, goes WOW and moved on. About 10,000 pple were digusted bcos they got conned to buy some Lehman mini-bonds. But actually that's quite far from what could have actually hit them worse. Oblivious to them and partly to me as well is the probability of a financial meltdown that could have happened. We always talked about it. But this has only happened a couple of times in history, usually localized in 1 or 2 countries (this round think Iceland, and maybe Korea) and only once on a global basis: the Great Depression.

When the first bailout plan failed to pass, it was said that we were close to the financial meltdown, systemic breakdown, start of the depression, beginning of the end, whatever you call it. But then global authorities took pain to alter the state of things, and here we are. *Phew* What a relief! And we can continue to just talk about financial meltdown without really going through it.

Well, what could actually happen?

Since I have never lived through one, I can merely speculate. And I assume most readers wouldn't have experienced one as well, so let's just ponder through the following scenarios and try to empathize.

1. Global stock markets collapse 90-95% from its previous high. This means STI will fall to 300. Yes, the no. of Spartans fighting 10,000 mini-bond investors no I believe it's Persians. Dow falls to 2,000 and Hang Seng 2,500. It will take more than a decade to surpass the previous peaks. As of now, global markets are roughly 50-70% from previous highs, though we averted the Great Depression scenario, we are not quite well off either. It will probably still take 8-10 years to surpass the previous peak made in 2007. But nevertheless, count ourselves lucky.

2. Many banks will fail, and I mean maybe like 40% of all the banks in the world or something. Globally, almost 10,000 banks failed during the Great Depression, bank runs were ubiquitous. Most people basically lost all their deposits bcos if everyone went to their banks to withdraw their savings at the same time, the bank definitely cannot pay up - which constitutes a bank run. This is scary if you think about it. Entire savings gone! The global authorities knew this and have put a stop by guaranteeing all deposits. Singapore did that too recently. In Iceland, they were a bit too late, so what they did was restricting everyone from withdrawing any money from the banks! Even foreigners who deposited in their foreign branches. Imagine your Maybank account getting frozen! But then, that's probably the right thing, bcos bank runs were one of the main reasons that led to the Great Depression. Ultimately the global financial system is built on confidence, without that, banks cannot exist, credit lines cannot exist, business cannot function, global economy cannot grow. We have ensured that credit lines will exist. Bank runs cannot occur. So this is good.

3. This time round, if things did go wrong, although we probably won't see 10,000 bank failures, some will still go. More of Northern Rock, IndyMac etc. When banks fail, corporations that rely on banks for credit to do their business cannot survive, there will be worldwide bankruptcies. My guesstimate is 40% of all listed companies going bankrupt. 80% of SMEs will fold. It will be a disaster on Richter Scale 10. Financial tsunami is an understatement. Nothing will be too big to fail. In fact bankruptcies become daily affairs. Workers will be just waiting for their turn, waiting for their co.s to go belly up.

4. With bankruptcies we have unemployment. During the Great Depression, unemployment hits 25% in the US. Today, it will probably hit 20% globally and maybe 33% in Singapore. So 1 in 3 people you know will be unemployed. Most likely you will also be unemployed. Most people will go broke. Their mortgages will be greater than the prices of their homes. And they have no money to pay. Govt may pass laws to stop banks for seizing these pples' properties bcos if they did, then we will see millions of homeless pple.

5. Those lucky ones with a job see salary cuts of 50-70%. Average household income falls drastically, consimption and prices follow. This time round, commodities are falling like autumn leaves already. Ultimately, goods and services prices will also fall 50-70%, but this comes at no relief bcos 30% of households have no income, those will income has only half of what it was. People cannot spend and hence less production, less jobs and the vicious cycle continues. So the Gahmen is right. Price increase is actually GOOD! ERP up GOOD! MRT fare up GOOD!

6. Global GDP falls 40% to USD 25trn or so and Singapore GDP halves to USD 60bn. Our reserves of USD 100bn come into play to help Singapore, probably to finance some sort of massive fiscal spending like reclaiming land to link all the islands surrounding Singapore, including Tekong, Jurong Island, Sentosa and building 100km bridges to Kusu Island and Bintan. Still it will take 5-10 years for GDPs to return to previous levels.

In short, it's Armageddon. So aren't we glad we averted this outcome and can blog about it?
Investment advice, CFA tuition, stock analysis, value investing, financial statement, financial ratios, earnings drivers, SWOT analysis, secular trends, stock screens

Pantene Chrysalis

October 22nd, 2008 by la papillion
San introduced me to this short movie:



It's really a short movie (4:03), and it's a million times better than most thai flicks i've seen, despite it's length. It's the blending of music and moving stills that creates such an emotive force within me that I get goose bumps every time I saw this. And I've watched it at least five times. There is really only one sound track in this short film, it's none other than Pachelbel's Canon in D. The movie blends in the touching parts of the film with the touching parts of the song, creating an emotive resonance that can only be amplified by the melancholic nature of the violin and piano. There is only around 4 lines of spoken dialogue, but like the classical piece without lyrics, the movie without dialogue makes one focus on the emotional aspects of the film. Climatic scenes are punctuated with short and sharp jabs of the violin. Violent scenes are accompanied by the jarbled and forceful piano song (i don't know which piece is that, can anyone trained in such music kindly enlighten?).

I really like the scene when the camera pans slowly to the broken violin, made to work one last time using scotch tape. The song slowly sinks into your emotions, which is then followed by the quick stabbing of the violin and ends abruptly. Amazing!

Do notice the butterfly towards the end. I think that's what san is showing me :)

The butterfly breaks out of the chrysalis, which is the cocoon like thing that a caterpillar wraps itself during the first stage of the metamorphosis. When it breaks out of this cocoon, the caterpillar changes structurally, to the extent that one cannot see any similarities between the former and present self. I suppose that that is why the short film puts a butterfly towards the end. It shows both the metamorphism undergone by the girl as she reaches new height in her music (she finally understand what it means by music being 'visible'), as well as the main purpose of the short film - to sell more bottles of pantene chrysalis.

Superfriends meeting on 31st Oct 2008

October 21st, 2008 by la papillion
For those who are regulars in my cbox, you would probably have known that on Friday, 31st October 2008, the Superfriends of Bullythebear will be having a dinner and dance party at Wood restaurant bar, Vivocity. Erm, dance is optional of course, but maybe we can all ask dream the golden buddha to do a little jiggle for us after a few glasses of wine. It's going to be held in a private function room at Woods, timing will be advised when it's nearer the event next week.

I would like to confirm the attendees for the event. For those who had been invited, or wish to be invited, please confirm your attendance using the comments button right at the bottom of the post. Alternatively, you can choose to email me at duckula06 [at] yahoo [dot] com (it's zero six behind). If I did not reply your mail within 24 hours, u can safely assume that I didn't receive it...my yahoo mail is a bit crazy at times. Text me at nine-four-three-five--eight-nine-three-zero, DO NOT call me as I may be in the middle of work, thks! Do tell me who you are in your email/sms too.

The budget is around $40-50 per person, depending on the items you ordered. The menu is given here at this site, so do check it out. With bro dream going to negotiate a better deal for us, and yours truly guaranteeing that it will not go above $50, do consider attending this rare event to meet all of the superfriends in person. If not for the company, go for the food. If not for the food, go for the wine. If not for the wine, just go there for dinner!

Here are the list of attendees:

Confirmed going:

Me, LP
My gf
San
Dream the golden buddha
Cheng
KK

Special guests (for drinks only - not 100% confirmation)

Cookieguy
Lumiere
Pepper

Please RSVP, best before Tues 28th Oct. Dream will need to confirm the attendees so that the restaurant staff can prepare the table.

Keep your style, fade your fashion

October 20th, 2008 by la papillion
It's simply not fashionable to invest in debt-ridden companies now.

Investment are like clothes. There are investments themes that come and go with the vicissitudes of fashion wear. From my short history of market experience, I already can see the different main fashion themes which are hot at different periods.




In the bull market, there are many many themes. Sector rotation, I think that's what they call it. I used to pay attention to companies belonging to a certain sector, like construction plays, oil plays, property plays etc, and look out for companies in those sector that had not run up. I had the misfortune to take part in the construction play leading right to the end of year 2006/2007 and consequently became the last fool holding the unwanted babies. Despite the many themes, the underlying premise of buying is based on PE.

Let me explain. When the market conditions are bullish and prices of stocks are breaking their 52 week high, it's simply not fashionable to invest in P/B kind of stocks. PE values are all time high, so to entice investors to put their monies, low PE stocks are trumpeted as the next growth stock to run up. I've not personally seen another metric used in bullish times locally, which is Price to revenue P/R ratio, though I read that in the telecom/dot.com era in 1990s, there are plenty of such analysts keen on this metric. It's not unexpected isn't it? When prices are so high, and earnings haven't begun to catch up on the prices, the best way to show value is to use some metrics that are independent of the earnings and/or profitability of the companies in question, but instead based on the rapid growth of the companies (never mind profitability, it'll catch up).

However, when the tide turns in a bearish market, fashion police of the investing realm dictate that P/B becomes the new yardstick of measurement. Book value defined as total assets - total liabilities, becomes the fashionable thing to valuate companies. We hear of analysts saying about the P/B of banks or properties counters or reits or whatever being at all time low, compared with SARS, Asian financial crisis, dot.com era or other similarly bearish times. I reasoned that this is the case because the market price of the company are supported by the assets owned after all the liabilities are paid to creditors. As such, P/B ratio becomes the valuation metric of choice when market conditions are bad.

The current aversion towards debt-ridden companies resulted in the relentless selling across the board of such companies regardless of business economics. Shipping stocks seem to be whacked hard for being in the wrong kind of business in the wrong time. S-shares, which are singapore listed china companies, are whacked down hard after the scare by Ferrochina and China painting & dyeing company. That means if you're a s-share and a shipping company, you're doubly screwed. YZJ and Cosco are two examples that spring to my mind.

I also noticed that dividends, ignored during bull market, are back in vogue when times are bearish. Analyst are always touting the high dividend yield of certain companies as being defensive. Reits, most showing double digits yield, are sold to investors as offering higher yields than the miserably low interest rates offered by savings account. The reason we don't talk about dividend yields during bullish times is two-fold - first being that the prices are marked up so high that the yields are nothing to boast about. Second, the capital gains from sheer price appreciation is much more tempting and lucrative than the steady and slower dividend gains.

Here's a summary of some of the metric mentioned and the times they are in vogue:

1. Price earnings ratio P/E = bull
2. Price revenue ratio P/R = bull
3. CAGR growth or CAGR revenue % = bull
4. Price to book P/B = bear
5. Cash per share = bear
6. Dividend yield % = bear
7. Liquidity ratios like current, quick, gearing = bear

One can take advantage of this whimsical swings in the investing realm in two ways. The first is to trade (long/short) the fashion trends by identifying possible candidates. For example, after ferrochina announced its death note, a few days in a row, s-shares was shorted furiously down to crisis levels, especially those debt ridden companies. Another way to take advantage of this is to always prepare one's portfolio for the bear. Chasing the price of companies so as to ride on its growth story is not exactly preparing for bearish times.

Fashion fade, but style is forever - Yves Saint Laurent

Have your own style, don't keep chasing after fashions. By the time the fashion magazines announced what is the hottest for this season, that season is over. Don't be caught wearing last season's wear.

Be a valueskate, not cheapskate

October 19th, 2008 by la papillion
With recession looming like dark clouds over our heads, I think it's a good idea to start a label for my opinions on personal finance. Is it surprising that I'll start on this topic? It shouldn't be, because investing is basically a philosophy that can best be summarized like this: Forgo immediate wants for future gains. I think this philosophy can be extended to the broader aspects of life, rather than just the myopic realm of investing only.

I've a happy problem. I've got difficulties spending money on myself. I find it strange because I can commit 10k into the stock market without batting an eyelid but I've got problems spending $10 on socks. I've been eyeing this brand of socks by Byford, which are rather cheap, for almost a year. I've been wearing those black socks issued by SAF, but the quality is quite questionable as after a few washings, the socks will become quite distorted and gets 'hardened'. Those who wore it before will know what I meant by 'hardened' socks, haha!

How much are the socks, u ask? It's selling for around $10 for 3 pairs, which is about as cheap as it can get. I wonder why I took so long to decide on buying it :) At the rate that I'm walking, I 'holed' socks very frequently, so it's important for me to get good quality at cheap prices. I'm going to dump my SAF issued black socks for the new ones.

Recently I also bought a pair of shoes. I've been using a cheap $23 shoe for more than 10 months, which I think is very good value for money. I used to think that the more I pay, the more quality I get. My previous pairs are from caterpillar, selling around $80 to $100 per pair. But guess what? It didn't last me 6 months. I changed my philosophy on buying shoes now: Buy it cheap, if it last longer than expected, it's a bonus - if it didn't last long, at least I didn't spend too much on it. Buy a pair of shoes for $23 is better than buying one for $90, because while the latter can last me for 6 mths, I can buy 3-4 pairs of the former :) There! My downside (price) is taken care of, the upside (how long it lasts) will get care of itself.

The new crocodile shoes I bought in a sale cost me $29. It is much much better than my previous pair because there are ample support at the heels. From here, I also learnt another lesson: Cheap does not equal to value. My previous pairs makes my angle painful because when my heel strike the floor, the shock goes up instead of being absorbed by sponges or other cushioned support. Be a value hunter, not a cheapskate.

My blade shaver is getting blunt too (and a little rusty), so I thought of getting another one. At guardian pharmacy, I saw that there are two brands of shaver - one from the famous Gillette and the other is the less well known Schick. 3 pieces of Gillette's blade cost $22, while the same quantity of Schick's blade will cost me $12. I decided to try out Schick, even though I've been using Gillette since I started shaving. The mechanical parts of Schick seems to be more inferior than Gillette (it feels a little rickety) but nevertheless do the job it's supposed to do well. I maintain my blades very well, so the $12 is money well spent. The recommendation is to change the blades monthly but I think I've used my blade for 1.5-2 yrs already.




I'm sharing all these because I think that at all times, it's good to control one's expenses. It's only when in recessionary times that we hear people talking about cutting costs, whereas I think one should always trim excesses and adopt a lifestyle that is simple but not cheapskate. For those familiar with Greek philosopher Diogenes, I think I bear a resemblance to him.