Friday 25 June 2010

G20 nations see different paths for securing recovery

REUTERS, Jun 25, 2010, 08.47am IST


TORONTO/WASHINGTON: World leaders aimed for a common target on Thursday of securing the economic recovery, but disagreed over how best to reach it.

With two days to go before the Group of 20 summit convenes in Toronto, officials tried to downplay differences between the United States and Europe over how quickly to shift from crisis-fighting mode to budgetary belt-tightening.

"That's the delicate balance that we need to try to strike this weekend," Canadian finance minister Jim Flaherty said.

His US counterpart, Timothy Geithner, said each country needed to decide what policy mix made sense to ensure both growth and fiscal responsibility.

"Our job is to make sure we're all sitting there together, focused on this challenge of growth and confidence because growth and confidence are paramount," he said in an interview with BBC World News America.

The G20 club of rich and emerging economies joined forces at the height of the global financial panic and poured an estimated $5 trillion into stimulus spending, emergency loans and bank guarantees, helping to ward off a global depression. 

The group still has a long and difficult to-do list, including forging consensus on new rules about how much capital that banks must hold, and making sure national financial regulatory reforms do not clash on a global scale.

The cost of fighting the financial crisis and recession left gaping holes in government finances, and Greece's debt troubles have focused Europe's attention on the need to shrink budget deficits before investors lose patience. 

European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso said Europe could no longer afford to borrow and spend, and must repair budgets in order to rebuild confidence for growth. 

"It will not be a change overnight but
there is no more room for deficit spending," Barroso told a news conference in Toronto.

The United States wants to make sure European countries - Germany, in particular - do not remove government supports too quickly because that could derail the recovery.

US stocks fell on Thursday on concerns over the durability of the economic rebound.

President Barack Obama, pushing Washington's pro-growth, line, said "surplus countries" - often code for Germany and China - must find ways to stimulate growth. But he also acknowledged that countries including the United States with medium- and long-term deficit problems would have to address them.

"Not every country is going to respond exactly the same way, but all of us are going to have responsibilities to rebalance in ways that allow for long-term, sustained economic growth," Obama said in Washington during an appearance with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

White House economic adviser Lawrence Summers, in an interview with Reuters, also stressed that growth would be key, but said it was not simply a matter of choosing between austerity and expansion.

"There obviously is an importance in having a growth strategy, but I think it's too simple to think of growth strategies only as running budget deficits or printing money," he said. 


In Europe, senior officials were in no mood to back down on their plans to cut spending.

Saying she expected "controversial discussions" in Toronto over Europe's budget priorities, German Chancellor Angela Merkel insisted Berlin would forge ahead with its biggest program of fiscal cutbacks since World War II.

European Central Bank president Jean-Claude Trichet dismissed the idea budget cuts could torpedo the fragile economic recovery that is taking hold.

"The idea that austerity measures could trigger stagnation is incorrect," Trichet told Italian newspaper La Repubblica, describing the German budget plans as "good" and repeating calls for more fiscal discipline in the 16-nation euro zone. 

Merkel, who aims to save 80 billion euros in the next four years, told ARD television that sustained growth could only be guaranteed through getting a grip on deficits and debt. 

"I and the EU will argue this position. There are others who are not yet so convinced of this exit strategy," she said.

The G20, which includes the world's biggest economies and two-thirds of its population, holds its summit in Toronto on Saturday and Sunday. It will be preceded by a meeting on Friday and Saturday of the G8, composed of Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States.

Downtown Toronto's downtown banking district has seen business drop off as heavy security is mounted. Canadian police said on Thursday they had arrested the driver of a car near the meeting site who was carrying a chainsaw, crossbow and fuel containers.

BANKING REFORM

Economic policy has not been the only issue dividing the G20, which has also seen its unity tested by reforms to the banking sector.

European proposals for global taxes on banks and financial transactions have run into opposition from countries like Canada that say their banks are in good health. 

European countries are concerned that planned new rules requiring banks to set aside more capital may crimp lending.

Obama, meanwhile, hopes to sign off on rules to regulate finance within weeks as lawmakers raced to meet a Thursday deadline they had set themselves to agree on their own financial overhaul package.

Obama signalled on Thursday that China's move this week to relax the peg of its currency, the yuan, to the dollar may not be enough to shield Beijing from accusations that it is using the currency to gain an unfair trade advantage. 

"The initial signs were positive. But it is too early to tell whether the appreciation, that will track the market, is sufficient to allow for the rebalancing that we think is appropriate," Obama said.

The yuan has risen by about 0.4 percent against the dollar since Beijing's policy change - a significant step relative to its earlier freeze, but far less than the 25 to 40 per cent increase that some analysts say it needs to make to achieve fair value.

Warren Buffett raises Tesco stake in sign of support for new chief

Warren Buffett, the 'Sage of Omaha', has upped his stake in Tesco, in a tacit sign that he supports the supermarket retailer's succession plans.

Tesco
Mr Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway investment conglomerate raised its stake in Tesco to 3.02pc, following a recent share purchase.
A disclosure to the London Stock Exchange by Berkshire disclosed that it recently bought 1.85m shares, taking its total holding to 242m shares.
Tesco shares rose 3½ to 400.8p on the news that the world's third richest man – Forbes estimates Mr Buffett's fortune to be $47bn – has faith in the company's strategy.
The increase comes just two weeks after Sir Terry Leahy announced plans to step down in March next year, to be replaced by Phil Clarke, the retailer's international chief, in one of smoothest succession plans seen at a FTSE100 company in some time.
Although the regulatory statement did not contain any comment by Berkshire or Mr Buffett, it is thought that he must approve of the supermarket group's strategy and must also feel that Tesco's shares are undervalued in order to top up his holding.
Berkshire first appeared on Tesco's share register in May 2006, when it took a 1pc stake, and has been increasing it gradually since then.
Although perhaps better known for his investment in the insurance and financial services sector – not least the canny bets he made on Goldman and General Electric during the financial crisis – Mr Buffett has a quite the passion for retailers and consumer-focussed companies.
One of the companies he holds dearest to his heart is Coca-Cola - maker of his beloved Cherry Coke – which is Berkshire's single largest investment.
Berkshire also controls Dairy Queen, the iconic American ice cream chain of whose low-cost desserts Mr Buffett is a regular indulgee.
Other consumer investments include Kraft, the chief executive of which Mr Buffett lambasted at Berkshire's annual meeting in May for pulling off a "dumb deal" in buying Cadbury, the British confectioner.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/epic/tsco/7852559/Warren-Buffett-raises-Tesco-stake-in-sign-of-support-for-new-chief.html

Warren Buffett raises Tesco stake in sign of support for new chief

Warren Buffett, the 'Sage of Omaha', has upped his stake in Tesco, in a tacit sign that he supports the supermarket retailer's succession plans.

 
Tesco
Mr Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway investment conglomerate raised its stake in Tesco to 3.02pc, following a recent share purchase.
A disclosure to the London Stock Exchange by Berkshire disclosed that it recently bought 1.85m shares, taking its total holding to 242m shares.
Tesco shares rose 3½ to 400.8p on the news that the world's third richest man – Forbes estimates Mr Buffett's fortune to be $47bn – has faith in the company's strategy.
The increase comes just two weeks after Sir Terry Leahy announced plans to step down in March next year, to be replaced by Phil Clarke, the retailer's international chief, in one of smoothest succession plans seen at a FTSE100 company in some time.
Although the regulatory statement did not contain any comment by Berkshire or Mr Buffett, it is thought that he must approve of the supermarket group's strategy and must also feel that Tesco's shares are undervalued in order to top up his holding.
Berkshire first appeared on Tesco's share register in May 2006, when it took a 1pc stake, and has been increasing it gradually since then.
Although perhaps better known for his investment in the insurance and financial services sector – not least the canny bets he made on Goldman and General Electric during the financial crisis – Mr Buffett has a quite the passion for retailers and consumer-focussed companies.
One of the companies he holds dearest to his heart is Coca-Cola - maker of his beloved Cherry Coke – which is Berkshire's single largest investment.
Berkshire also controls Dairy Queen, the iconic American ice cream chain of whose low-cost desserts Mr Buffett is a regular indulgee.
Other consumer investments include Kraft, the chief executive of which Mr Buffett lambasted at Berkshire's annual meeting in May for pulling off a "dumb deal" in buying Cadbury, the British confectioner.

"Cut versus growth" debate: Barack Obama is refusing to listen to reason on economic policy

Barack Obama is refusing to listen to reason on economic policy

President Barack Obama could learn from the old-fashioned German habit of saving money before spending it, argues Jeremy Warner.

 
Barack Obama is refusing to listen to reason on economic policy; Barack Obama will meet other world leaders at the G20 summit; AFP
Barack Obama will meet other world leaders at the G20 summit Photo: AFP
Rarely has the dismal science of economics inflamed such passions. While the "cuts versus growth" debate has been building steadily for more than a year on both sides of the Atlantic, over the past week it has exploded into open international hostilities.
A compromised form of words will already have been agreed for the communiqué to follow this weekend's meeting of G8 and G20 leaders; the sherpas who do the preparatory donkey work for these stage-managed events will have ensured it.
But behind the anodyne platitudes of any statement, the tensions have reached fever pitch. Gone is the co-operative consensus that, in adversity 18 months ago, brought G20 nations together to fight the downturn.
In its place lies a clear line of demarcation that almost exactly mirrors our own political debate in Britain over the economic consequences of George Osborne's Emergency Budget cuts. Yet though this debate masquerades as high intellect, it has about as much to do with economics as the outcome of the World Cup.
President Barack Obama, backed to some extent by Nicolas Sarkozy of France, wants economic stimulus to continue until the global recovery is unambiguously secure. In the opposite corner is Germany's Angela Merkel, now oddly aligned with Britain's new political leadership in thinking the time is right for fiscal austerity.
Like much of what Mr Obama says and does these days, the US position is cynically political. With mid-term elections looming and the Democrats down in the polls, the administration hasn't yet even begun to think about deficit reduction. Obama is much more worried by the possibility of a double-dip recession and the damage this would do to his chances of a second term, than the state of the public finances.
As it happens, the public debt trajectory is rather worse in the US than it is in Europe, yet Obama has adopted an overtly "spend until we are broke" approach in a calculated bid for growth and votes.
Part of the reason he can afford to do this is that the dollar remains the world's reserve currency of choice. For some reason, international investors still want to hold dollar assets, which for the time being gives the US government an almost limitless capacity to borrow. As we know, not everyone enjoys this luxury.
Mr Obama's cheerleader-in-chief in arguing the case for continued international deficit spending is the American economist Paul Krugman. This hyperactive Nobel prize winner has achieved almost celebrity status for his extreme neo-Keynesian views. Unfortunately, his frequent polemics on the supposed merits of letting rip public spending long since ceased to be based on objective analysis, and are instead argued as a matter of almost ideological conviction. He's as much a fundamentalist as the "deficit hawks" he mocks.
As it happens, nobody is asking America to axe and burn with immediate effect, though you might not think this to read Professor Krugman's ever more hysterical commentaries on the fiscal austerity sweeping Europe. But some sort of a plan for long-term debt reduction, other than blind reliance on growth, might be helpful.
Chancellor Merkel's approach looks equally political. With her own position under some threat, she has taken, with growing conviction, to preaching the teutonic virtues of fiscal discipline and long-term economic planning. Self-flagellation is judged to play as well with German voters as profligacy does with Americans.
These culturally very different approaches to politics and economics were brilliantly described by the German finance minister, Wolfgang Schauble, in a recent newspaper article. "While US policymakers like to focus on short-term corrective measures," he wrote, "we take the longer view and are therefore more preoccupied with the implications of excessive deficits and the dangers of high inflation… This aversion, which has its roots in German history, may appear peculiar to our American friends, whose economic culture is in part shaped by deflationary episodes. Yet these fears are among the most potent factors of consumption and savings rates in our country."
Just as America takes its popular understanding of economic catastrophe from the Great Depression of the 1930s, for Germans it is the great inflations of the inter- and post-war years, the first of which destroyed middle-class savings and contributed to the rise of political extremism.
There are no rights and wrongs in this debate, but by implicitly criticising Germany for not doing enough to stimulate domestic demand, Mr Obama displays his usual lack of understanding of foreign affairs – or rather, perhaps deliberately chooses to dismiss perfectly legitimate alternative approaches to the same problem.
Few countries did as much as Germany to sustain economic activity in the downturn. What's more, despite the rhetoric of deficit reduction, its fiscal stance remains expansionary throughout the remainder of this year and is only mildly negative next year. The goal of returning to balanced budgets by 2015/16 is entirely reasonable given the demands and constraints of an ageing population, is in line with the same ambition set by George Osborne this week, and can in any case be suspended if the economy begins to shrink again.
As Mr Schauble has repeatedly pointed out, seeking to engineer greater domestic demand by taking on more government borrowing is, for Germany at least, counter-productive, for Germans do not feel confident in their spending unless cushioned by adequate savings. Some might think these the sort of old-fashioned virtues that need to be relearnt in more profligate advanced economies, such as America and Britain.
I don't want to push the argument too far, for there is no doubt that by exporting debt to its neighbours, Germany played a central role in the fiscal crisis that has engulfed the fringe nations of the eurozone. There is no obvious answer to these inherent fault lines within the European monetary union, other perhaps than a return to sovereign currencies.
But to expect Germany to become less competitive so that the Greeks and Spaniards can be more so is absurd. It's a bit like arguing that elite marathon runners should slow down to allow others to catch up.
In berating others to carry on spending, Mr Obama is being neither politically wise nor economically sound. He should instead be attending to his own back yard by mapping out some sort of credible, long-term plan for returning the US to balanced budgets.
David Cameron is going to find himself ahead of the curve among the G8 this weekend, for his own plans for fiscal retrenchment are, if anything, rather more advanced and detailed than even those of Germany. In Britain, only the Labour Opposition and its supporters still think this the wrong approach – but given they were the ones that got us into this fiscal mess in the first place, they would do, wouldn't they?

G20: leaders assemble as divisions emerge on whether to cut or spend

The leaders of the world's biggest economies will assemble in Toronto this weekend for a G-20 summit, amid growing tensions on how best to head off a second global recession.

 
David Cameron arrives in Canada for Friday's G-8 summit and this weekend's G-20 summit.
David Cameron arrives in Canada for Friday's G-8 summit and this weekend's G-20 summit.
The G20 summit, which starts in the Canadian capital on Saturday, comes as the Obama administration insists that governments' policies must focus on bolstering the recovery, rather than immediately tackling deficits.
“We must demonstrate a commitment to reducing long-term deficits, but not at the price of short-term growth,” US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner argued in an article in the Wall Street Journal. “Without growth now, deficits will rise further.”
By contrast, David Cameron arrives at his first major international summit days after laying out a Budgetthat put tackling Britain's record deficit at the heart of his new government's policy. Mr Cameron and his Chancellor, George Osborne, argue that a failure to reduce the deficit poses an even bigger threat to the recovery, as it will risk a Greek-style debt crisis.
The Prime Minister played down the tension with Obama, saying "this weekend isn’t about a row over fiscal policy. We all agree about the need for fiscal consolidation."
The policy headache facing governments isn't helped by the lack of consensus among experts over whether further stimulus or deficit reduction is what's required. Nobel Prize-winner Paul Krugman has warned that rapid cuts in spending and tax rises will tip the world back into a global recession and repeat the mistakes of the 1930s.

Comparing P/E ratios to growth rates can be significantly more useful than simply comparing two companies' P/E ratios. Why?

Let's compare Company A to its competitor in the same industry Company B to illustrate.

Company A

Price $10

Last year's EPS $1.16

Projected EPS  $1.33


Company B

Price $ 8

Last year's EPS  $1.14

Projected EPS  $1.14


Using the data above, you can see that Company A's trailing P/E is 8.6, while Company B's is just 7.

Why would you want to pay $10 for Company A's earnings when you can get Company B's - the same amount, no less  - for $2 off?  (You could even take the $2 to give yourself a treat. )  :-)

Which company would you buy - Company A or Company B?  Why?

Answer:  Click here.

Poorer Countries Taking Over Global Economy

June 24, 2010, 12:45 PM

Poorer Countries Taking Over Global Economy

Ten years ago, the world’s richest countries accounted for a significant majority of the globe’s economic activity. But the pendulum is swinging in the other direction, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.
A new O.E.C.D. report finds that rich countries and poor countries now each contribute about an equal share of the global economy. And by 2030, developing countries will account for 57 percent of world G.D.P.:
DESCRIPTIONSource: O.E.C.D.Note: These data apply Angus Maddison’s long-term growth projections to his historical PPP-based estimates for 29 O.E.C.D member countries and 129 non-member economies.
“[T]he economic and financial crisis is accelerating this longer-term structural transformation in the global economy,” according to a release from the agency.
The projections are based  on research on economic growth by the late Angus Maddison, who tried to model world G.D.P. numbers going all the way back to Year 1.

Buy the rumour, sell the news goes the old adage.

Follow the market rumour

Prashant Mahesh & Nikhil Walavalkar, ET Bureau





Buy the rumour, sell the news goes the old adage. One sees this playing out in markets all the time. Share prices inch up days before a company announces its results only to correct immediately after the company declares record profits.

But recent events have shown that following rumours can prove to be quite hazardous for your financial well being. A few days ago, a leading bank’s stock saw its price tumble 3.5% during the day, on market rumours posted on a blog. Though the stock subsequently recovered with the bank denying any such thing, this has important lessons for retail investors to learn. “One of ten rumours may be true, so if you are an investor, do wait for verification before acting on the news”, says VK Sharma, head private broking & wealth management, HDFC Securities.

Get information

Today you can place orders on the broker who is sitting on a live terminal or even use the internet to trade online, and know the status of the order with every passing second. Similarly, dissemination of information has changed. In 1995, you had to rely on the newspaper or the annual report from the company for corporate information with very few having access to the internet, which was primarily used for sending e-mails only.

However, today, dissemination of information happens in nano seconds. You have wire services, websites, 24-hour television channels, blogs, corporate websites where you have a plethora of information. With the markets getting increasingly globalised, news comes from various parts of the world. The question now is: How does an investor separate the wheat from the chaff?

Types of news flows

There could be a variety of news affecting financial markets. Some could be company specific. For instance, a company wins an income-tax case in which a refund of Rs 1,000 crore is involved, which improves the cash flow of the company.

Other types of news could be macro-economic or geopolitical in nature. Take for example, Met department forecasts of rains being below normal. Such news is not specific to a company but could affect the markets.

Source of news

Follow the trail. When the news reaches you, try and identify the source of the news. If it is an official announcement, you will find it on the website of the stock exchange, where it is listed. If there is no such announcement on the exchange site, wait for the clarification from the company’s end. Large companies do come up with clarifications as soon as possible.

Investors could look for clarifications in electronic media, such as news channels and official website of the company. “In a market where many M&As are occurring, it is very easy to spread rumours. However an investors must remember that there is no free lunch”, says Sadanand Shetty, vice-president & senior fund manager, Taurus Mutual Fund.

The potential traps

There are a lot of unregulated entities who keep feeding markets with rumours, short-term and positional calls on the stock markets. If and when investors subscribe to these services, they must clearly know that these are not necessarily fundamental calls and by subscribing to these services the investor is taking a risk. These can be stock price manipulation attempts and you may be caught on the wrong side of the activity.

Also there are instances where you receive SMS’s from unknown entities giving some information about or a trading call on a stock. Be very careful before acting on the stock. Instances have been observed where volumes are created in the market, spreading information using bulk SMS service, to offload one’s position.

If you are a trader

In the short-term, markets may be affected by greed and fear, which could affect your position. So every trader needs to work with a stop loss. Besides, you should not trade a stock when adverse rumours are already floating in the market on the same. Buy on rumour and sell on news has been the norm in stock markets for a long time.

It makes sense not to act on news that has come after a long rumour mill in the market. It is likely that the impact of the development is already factored in the market price and ‘early birds’ may prefer to book their profits upon confirmation of news. In that case the stock moves contrary to the impact anticipated.

If you are an investor

As an investor you don’t have access to the company’s management at short notice. Hence whenever you invest, it is essential that you invest on the basis of company fundamentals.

If the fundamental research is right, then rumours are unlikely to affect the company and it is only a matter of time before the stock bounces back. Such temporary weakness can be used to add to your positions in the market.