Home About Archives RSS Feed

@theMarket: The Same Old Song

By Bill Schmick
iBerkshires Columnist

Investors have been waiting all year for that elusive interest rate hike promised by our central bank. September proved to be another false start. Once again, markets rallied on the news, the dollar fell, and investors were happy. So what's new?

As we have written so many times in the past, investors and markets are fixated on a Fed rate hike. Now everyone's attention is on December. Janet Yellen, the Fed chieftain, indicated that she could see at least one rate hike this year — if the data warrants it. The problem is the economic numbers are, at best, inconclusive.

Even the central bank, in this last go-around at the FOMC, lowered its forecast for the future, long-term, growth rate of the U.S. economy. Back in 2011, it forecast a 2.5 percent growth rate. Then lowered it to 2 percent in June and now sees no more than 1.8 percent. That sure doesn't sound like we are going in the right direction.

Furthermore, the Fed's inflation target, which is slightly above 2 percent, has been stuck below that number for years and it does not appear that it will climb anytime soon. You might ask if inflation is contained and economic growth is slowing, why in the world would the Fed raise rates.

The only bright stop seems to be the employment gains we have experienced in the last few years. Even in that area, there has been some dissatisfaction with the quality of jobs the economy has been generating. The number of workers who are either underemployed or have given up looking for a job altogether skew the statistics. The only reason I can see for the Fed to raise rates is to answer Wall Street's demand for a return to "normalization."

That's financial speak for getting the Fed out of the financial markets. Free marketers want the Fed to return to the days when they were not trying to support stocks, bonds, and even commodities as well as overseas markets. I truly doubt the Fed was ever that hands-off when it came to control, but they have been more heavy-handed in their approach to the markets since 2009 and with good cause.

As I have written many times before, the unprecedented lack of any kind of fiscal stimulus out of Washington has resulted in the failure of the U.S. economy to gain any momentum. The Fed knows that and the market knows that. But we all choose to blame the Fed instead.

In the meantime, we are dancing to the same old song. Fed members say "maybe" and the market swoons, followed by no rate cut and the market rallies. Equities remain the only game in town. It's simple: the S&P 500 Index is yielding 3 percent while the ten-year U.S. Treasury note is giving you less than 2 percent. Investors will go where they get the most return.

It also means that volatility will continue. It is why I am advising you to hang in there and ignore the ups and downs. A week ago (before the Fed decision), the markets were prepared for further downside. Today, we are once again approaching the highs of the year — until we hear from the next hawkish Fed member. But remember, a rate hike will be data dependent. It doesn't matter what one or another Fed member might think, so try and ignore the chatter.

Monday night we will also be treated to the first presidential debate. I am sure that will impact the markets, unless the event is a washout for both sides. Since we are approaching the final lap in that race, the polls will be monitored daily. If Clinton's lead over Trump narrows as a result, expect a tantrum from the market. And so it goes.

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

Write a comment - 0 Comments            

The Independent Investor: The Impact of One Bad Apple

By Bill Schmick
iBerkshires Columnist

For years, the mantra of Corporate America has been that they are drowning in government rules and regulations. Small business has echoed that refrain, as has Wall Street. The problem is that these same entities continually shoot themselves in the foot.

Over the last two weeks, thanks to Wells Fargo in the banking sector, and Mylan Labs in pharmaceuticals, Corporate America has once again reminded us of that business just can't be trusted. In the case of Wells Fargo, over 2 million fictitious customer accounts were opened over several years in order to meet sales goals.

Critics say Mylan Labs' 500 percent increase (since 2007) in the cost of a device called EpiPen that treats severe allergic reactions is simply another case of rampant greed within the drug industry. They are not alone. Gilead Sciences and Valeant Pharmaceuticals have both been caught instituting similar price hikes on some of their drugs. And who can forget Martin Shkreli, the former head of Turing pharmaceuticals, who jacked up the price of a life-saving drug, Daraprim, from $13.50 to $750 per tablet (while giving the finger to all of us on tape).

Not only has the public reacted with anger over these incidents, but it has kept the idea alive that existing rules and regulations are justified. What's worse is that many politicians will use these events to pile even more restrictions on the nation's corporations.

Hell hath no fury compared to a politician with a meaty issue in an election year. Senators from both parties jostled for air time on Tuesday during a hearing over Wells Fargo's indiscretions. To say that Wells' chief executive officer was trashed up one side and down the other would be an understatement.

CEO John Stumpf, once the "pretty boy" of the financial industry, due to his company's relatively clean bill of health during the financial crisis, was vilified for going easy on the bank's leadership while firing thousands of lower-level workers. Legislatures used terms like "gutless leadership", "fraud" and "out of touch" executives to decry management's response to the scandal.

Next week, it is Mylan Lab's turn to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Heather Bresch, the CEO of the massive pharmaceutical company, will be on the hot seat. Politicians running for re-election will be vying for the microphone. Expect to hear how she and her company are guilty of price gouging among other charges.

While the hearings and their aftermath might provide entertaining reading, the consequences of these cases of corporate greed may have far-reaching effects on all of our industries.  There is a great deal of truth in the complaints of many businessmen, especially small businessmen, that Federal, state and local regulations are making it almost impossible to run a profitable business, but at the same time, one bad apple after another pops up justifying the chains that bind the entire cart.

After the 2009 financial crisis, a flood of new regulations and reforms swamped the banking industry. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act were signed into law in 2010. Among other things, it created yet another agency: the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The Federal Reserve was given more power as were a slew of other governmental agencies. Lending practices, reserve requirements, trading restrictions and countless more new regulations were foisted on the banking industry. The idea behind this avalanche of rules and regulations were to ensure that "never again" will Americans be subjected to these "too big to fail" bailouts.

Hillary Clinton has already promised to deal with these outrageous pricing issues in the drug sector. As such, does anyone want to guess the chances of reducing regulations on either the pharmaceutical or banking industry? As long as industry continues to shoot itself in the foot, what else can one expect?

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

Write a comment - 1 Comments            

@theMarket: Much Ado About Nothing

By Bill Schmick
iBerkshires Columnist

It has been a volatile week in the markets. The averages have rocketed up and down by a percent or more as traders bet for and against a Fed move on interest rates next week. Does it matter?

If you aren't tired after more than two years of reading what the Fed may or may not do, you have the patience of Job. Whether an interest rate hike happens next week during the FOMC meeting or in December should not mean much to the market. But it does.

When fully 70 percent or more of daily trading activity is now in the hands (or keyboards) of high-frequency traders (HFT), short-term moves are where they make most of their money. During the summer months, they practically starved to death while the markets did little to nothing. Now HFT is making up for lost time.

Granted, in many ways, the stock market is priced for perfection, given that the markets are only 3 percent off historical highs. There are few investments outside of stocks that can give you a decent return nowadays. The fact that interest rates are so low has a lot to do with that. Any change, no matter how small, in interest rates is meaningful at the margin.

Sure, a 25 basis point hike in the Fed Funds rate may not seem like a lot (and it isn't when it comes to the economy). But it does tilt the financial apple cart. And if one apple falls, who's to say that won't cause a chain reaction?  If enough apples are impacted, could the entire apple cart tip over?

Many traders believe that is exactly what happened last December when the Fed initially hiked rates. The stock market had a temper tantrum in January and February that resulted, at its worst, in a 13 percent decline. Of course, the markets have come back since then and gone on to new highs.

If history is any guide, and the Fed does raise rates before the end of the year, we could see the same sort of sell-off. But like the declines in January and February, they would not be a reason to sell. If anything, I would be a buyer of such a move. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

September and October are notoriously volatile months in the stock market. So far that historical trend is solidly intact. Since the Federal Open Market Committee meeting is on the 21st of September, which is next Wednesday, we should see this volatility continue until at least that date. I suspect, however, that regardless of what the Fed decides, the markets will continue to stay volatile.

Whether true or false, investors have it in their head that the Fed will raise rates, if not now, then in December.  And since markets usually discount news six to nine months out, I believe there is more downside ahead as markets adjust to an expected rate hike. Readers may recall that I have been looking for a pull-back in the single digit range and it appears that we are in that process now. Buy that does not necessarily mean a straight down market; we could even see a return to the old highs at some point before falling back.

It might be a drawn-out process that occurs between now and the election with plenty of peaks and valleys. Remember that Wall Street believes Hillary Clinton will win the election. Until recently, the polls gave her a substantial margin, confirming those expectations. As Donald Trump narrows that lead, these same investors will start to get nervous. Nervous leads to caution, caution leads to selling. There is no telling how close the election will become but the closer it is the more potential downside is in the offing.

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

Write a comment - 0 Comments            

The Independent Investor: Woman Need to Invest More

By Bill Schmick
iBerkshires Columnist

We all know women generally make less than men. On average, female workers make 77 cents for every dollar a man earns doing the same job. If you are a woman of color, or work in some lower paid industries, the gap could be even wider. It is one of the reasons women need to invest and save more, not less.

That may sound counter-intuitive. After all, if you are making less, you have less to save and invest. You are absolutely right, but there are important reasons that you still need to save more. One of the main reasons is that the chances are you will live longer than your male counterparts by about five years.

That means if you are living on $50,000 a year, you will need $250,000 (five years times $50,000) in additional income and assets simply to stay afloat until you die. And guess how much the gender wage cap will cost you over your career? The Women's Institute for a Secure Retirement figures that over your lifetime the wage gap will cost you $300,000. Do you see where I'm going here?

The numbers don't add up. Over 150 psychological studies have shown that most women are great at saving, but saving alone won't save you. The only way I believe women can overcome the wage gap penalty, while living longer, is through investing. But unfortunately, the same studies reveal that women are generally more risk-adverse than men when it comes to investing.

There are several reasons for that: everything from lack of confidence to the fear of becoming a homeless bag lady in their old age. The net result of this aversion to risk is less reward. And therefore less money to live on when you retire, get divorced, or experience the death of your husband.

And yet, study after study reveals that when women do invest, they do it well and, in most cases, outperform their male counterparts by almost 1 percent per year. I can attest to that since well over half of my clients are women.  One of the main reasons is that my female clients trade less than male clients. Frequent trading usually ends up with less, not greater, rewards over time.

For the most part, my female clients contribute to their tax-deferred savings plans on a far more regular basis than males. They also refrain from second-guessing their advisors as well. Given that they are usually paying a fee to have their investments managed, their "hands-off" attitude allows the professional to do their jobs. Many men, on the other hand, are like back-seat drivers, always tinkering with their portfolios usually at the wrong time and with the wrong investment.

Probably, their best investment trait is the ability and willingness to ask for help. And when they get advice that makes sense to them, they stay the course, despite the ups and downs which are always present in financial markets. When you combine all of the above, it is not difficult to understand why women investors outperform men.

The bottom line for women is that despite the wage, age and gender gap, you owe it to yourself to start investing and do it now. The longer you wait, the more difficult it will become to avoid that bag lady fate that haunts your dreams.

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

Write a comment - 0 Comments            

@theMarket: Markets Get Back to Business

By Bill Schmick
iBerkshires Columnist

Since Labor Day marked the end of summer for Wall Street, the big guys came back to work and evidently did not like what they saw. As this week comes to a close, all three indexes suffered losses.

Friday's downturn could be attributed to North Korea, the rogue state that detonated a nuclear device on Thursday night. Those kind of one-off political events often-times unsettle markets. Stocks went down, the dollar spiked as did interest rates and that I found interesting.

Normally, U.S. Treasury bonds are a safe haven so prices go up in times of uncertainty; but not Friday. We have to therefore look under the hood to discern what is really going on with the markets. Aside from the fact that stocks are due for some turbulence, the culprit seems to be additional worries over whether or not the Fed may surprise us by raising rates on September 21.

Then again, traders were somewhat disappointed that Mario Draghi, the chief of the European Central Bank, did not add further stimulus to the already-multi-billions of Euros the ECB is already pumping into their financial markets. Like junkies in search of their next high, traders want central banks to provide more and more easy money in order to justify higher equity prices.

Draghi disappointed them. He appears to have joined his counterparts at the U.S. Federal Reserve in telling the EU membership countries that it is their turn to take up the mantle. He especially singled out Germany in discussing why additional fiscal spending is necessary to accomplish the European bloc's hope for higher economic growth.

Of course European politicians, like those in America, have been sitting back, playing it safe and letting their central bank do all the heavy lifting on the economic front. Naturally, politicians on both sides of the Atlantic like the status quo. You see, doing nothing is not unique to American politicians.

By increasing spending, cutting taxes and/or regulations in order to grow the economy, legislatures are taking a chance. What will their constituents say if the deficit ballooned as a result? T Baggers, here in America, for example, would be out for blood.  I will be curious to see what happens when the Japanese Central Bank meets later this month. Will they send the same message to Japan's parliament?

But in the meantime, our Fed officials are busy sending mixed messages (as usual) over when they plan to raise interest rates in this country. Boston Fed President Eric Rosengren joined the “hawks” on the Fed in warning that rates need to rise soon.  Fed Governor Daniel Tarullo said on morning television, that he would rather wait until there was more proof that inflation was rising before he pulled the trigger.

Nonetheless, their contradictory comments were enough to send the stock market reeling and hike the probability of a September rate hike to 33 percent. In my opinion, I do not believe the Central Bank will hike in September. I do believe, however, that they do not want market participants to become too complacent about when the Fed will raise rates.

The more important question one must ask is what will happen to the stock market if the Fed does raise rates; if this week is any indication, nothing good. As you know, I have been preparing you for a market pull-back. This may be the beginning, and if it is, it won't be something to worry about, but it could be painful while it occurs.

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment adviser representative with Berkshire Money Management. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own. None of the information presented here should be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. Direct inquires to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com.

Write a comment - 0 Comments            
Page 1 of 100 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11 ... 100  
News Headlines
Q&A: Pownal Woman Conquers Appalachian Trail After Detour
North Adams Recovery Event Hears Voices of Recovery, Pain
Lanesborough's First New Firetruck in 20 Years Has Arrived
Buddy Walk Unites Families - And Athletes, Too, This Year
Adams to Test Memorial Building for Mold
BRTA Considering New Loop Route for North Adams
Darrow School Senior Nets Second Place in Poetry Conest
Fulbright Teaching Assistant Joins Williams College
Norman Rockwell Museum Welcomes New Board of Trustees Members
Cultural Pittsfield This Week: Sept. 23-29

Bill Schmick is registered as an investment advisor representative and portfolio manager with Berkshire Money Management (BMM), managing over $200 million for investors in the Berkshires. Bill’s forecasts and opinions are purely his own and do not necessarily represent the views of BMM. None of his commentary is or should be considered investment advice. Anyone seeking individualized investment advice should contact a qualified investment adviser. None of the information presented in this article is intended to be and should not be construed as an endorsement of BMM or a solicitation to become a client of BMM. The reader should not assume that any strategies, or specific investments discussed are employed, bought, sold or held by BMM. Direct your inquiries to Bill at 1-888-232-6072 (toll free) or email him at Bill@afewdollarsmore.com Visit www.afewdollarsmore.com for more of Bill’s insights.

 

 

 



Categories:
@theMarket (212)
Independent Investor (293)
Archives:
September 2016 (8)
August 2016 (5)
July 2016 (7)
June 2016 (7)
May 2016 (5)
April 2016 (7)
March 2016 (8)
February 2016 (5)
January 2016 (5)
December 2015 (6)
November 2015 (6)
October 2015 (9)
Tags:
Housing Fiscal Cliff Europe Wall Street Election Jobs Congress Rally Europe Greece Recession Retirement Banks Markets Pullback Debt Energy Economy Selloff Commodities Debt Ceiling Bailout Stocks Taxes Euro Deficit Interest Rates Japan Metals Currency Stock Market Stimulus Oil Crisis Federal Reserve
Popular Entries:
The Independent Investor: Don't Fight the Fed
The Independent Investor: Understanding the Foreclosure Scandal
@theMarket: QE II Supports the Markets
The Independent Investor: Does Cash Mean Currencies?
@theMarket: Markets Are Going Higher
The Independent Investor: General Motors — Back to the Future
The Independent Investor: Will the Municipal Bond Massacre Continue?
@theMarket: Economy Sputters, Stocks Stutter
The Independent Investor: Why Are Interest Rates Rising?
The Independent Investor: How Will Wall Street II Play on Main Street?
Recent Entries:
@theMarket: The Same Old Song
The Independent Investor: The Impact of One Bad Apple
@theMarket: Much Ado About Nothing
The Independent Investor: Woman Need to Invest More
@theMarket: Markets Get Back to Business
The Independent Investor: The VA — If It Isn't Broke, Don't Fix It
@theMarket: A Tale of Two Interest Rates
The Independent Investor: The VA Political Football
The Independent Investor: The More You Look, The More You Lose
@theMarket: Fedspeak Occupies A Dull Market