Friday, 16 September 2011
Thursday, 15 September 2011
To find out how you can enhance your returns by finding good dividend plays, check out the book below... Happy Investing - Oscar Sahlberg.
Income Investing Secrets: How to Receive Ever-Growing Dividend and Interest Checks, Safeguard Your Portfolio and Retire WealthyInvesting Books)
One of the main conclusions of this article is that you will need to incorporate successful dividend strategies to enhance returns in a low yield environment. Check out the book below to help get a better sense of the multitude of strategies you can use to achieve this... Happy Investing - Oscar Sahlberg.
The Ultimate Dividend Playbook: Income, Insight and Independence for Today's InvestorIntroduction to Investing Books)
Wednesday, 14 September 2011
Tuesday, 23 March 2010
Amidst this confusion, several charts from Citi research team caught my eyes. Tobias Levkovich has been drumming about on the lag of credit to industrial production (which in turn is a driver of the stock market itself).
That infamous chart (above) continues to suggest buoyant industrial activity (the caveat being is what if this is an atypical period compared to the last 20 years, which can then be challenged by “this time is different” has never really worked – don’t you just love economic dilemmas?!?!)
Now amidst a positive activity backdrop (which many argue is already priced in) the key question shifts to upside in margins. Having shed 6mn jobs ($240bn of “savings”) a bounce back in activity levels will drop down to profitability. (Now I hear you objecting: who will buy if the consumer is dead and out of a job? can we really sustain such high productivity levels – wouldn’t companies have to hire back all those people?) But lets concentrate on this one partial derivative for now. With 2/3 of company costs being labor, the importance of the labor savings become highly pronounced, even trouncing the commodity pressures that we so much fret about. The chart below shows how margins are correlated with labor costs (note that the RHS is inverted scale)
So with the spread between small businesses saying they will increase prices to small businesses saying they will increase wages going up, the higher margin argument becomes more plausible. (see chart below). Of course this dynamic will not be sustainable ad infinitum, but at least the 2010 margins could see a nice pop upwards given the slack in the employment market.
Sunday, 28 February 2010
At times it is instructive to go back in time and read some of the seminal pieces which describe the mood of that day. Worst case, you get a reminding glimpse of the prevailing thoughts (and giggle at their naïveté), but if you are lucky, you uncover a long forgotten treasure that provides you with timeless insight.
I recently stumbled upon Krugman’s 1994 piece, “The Myth of Asia’s Miracle.” Brushing aside the discussions surrounding the honesty of the statistics of the Eastern block, a perceivable faster growth rate in these economies was a worry to the West in the 1950s/1960s. Similarly, the contemporary thinkers were fretting about the Asian growth in the 1990s (when Krugman was writing). Yet one should not forget that it is the nature of production: the more inputs you throw at it, the more you will get out. Yet the basic law of economics, diminishing returns, start setting in. This means that there is a limit to input driven growth. On the other hand, we know that natural and sustainable growth path of per capita income is driven by a rise productivity.
As Krugman describes:
The immense Soviet efforts to mobilize economic resources were hardly news. Stalinist planners had moved millions of workers from farms to cities, pushed millions of women into the labor force and millions of men into longer hours, pursued massive programs of education, and above all plowed an ever-growing proportion of the country's industrial output back into the construction of new factories. Still, the big surprise was that once one had taken the effects of these more or less measurable inputs into account, there was nothing left to explain. The most shocking thing about Soviet growth was its comprehensibility.
At this point, it is instructive to dive into the slightly more technical paper of Alwyn Young, “A Tale of Two Cities.” In this seminal paper, Young compares the growth rates achieved between Hong Kong and
Yet throwing in factors of production under a state driven growth program (forced savings and massive surpluses being recycled into the economy) is not the most efficient way of achieving growth. Young argues that “driving the economy ahead of its learning maturity into the production of goods in which it has lower and lower productivity” is detrimental to the efficient growth of the economy. This is because “the costs of production are higher the further beyond the economy’s cumulated learning experience one tries to move.” The cost curve beyond the cumulated learning experience of the economy increases, which makes the new products increasingly costly and unprofitable to manufacture. To prove this point in real life, Young presents us with some striking data: a look at Singapore’s real return on capital to be one of the lowest in the world!
And this is exactly what is happening now in
What we see in these charts is that Developing Asia (from 1990-2009) and both Developing Asia and China (in the next 5 years) have achieved lower return on invested capital than implied by the iso-returns line (which is merely showing the same returns to capital over different combinations of GDP and Investment as & of GDP. In the charts, all countries to the north of the line have lower returns to capital).
From the perspective of the investor it is the return on capital that matters. On the other hand if you can increase the level each period, you will have sequential growth, even though this is not an endogenously sustainable method (i.e. it is not the natural growth path of the economy if left on its own). But when level effects are so large, as was in the case of
In the end, it is the return that matters. By giving low adjusted return on capital,
So going forward, the issue is not whether China can sustain this growth level. It can achieve this by playing around with the level effects whereby they continue to increase factors of production given that they still have much to achieve on that front but as long as this does not come from a genuine increase in productivity, returns on invested capital will continue to disappoint.