Grant Financial Group Today's Blog
GRANTFINANCIALTODAY.COM

Friday July 2, 2010 interview with John Grant and Tim Wood

Download | Duration: 00:12:46

Friday April 16, 2010 interview with John Grant & Tim Wood

Download | Duration: 00:27:38

Friday, April 2nd interview with John Grant & Tim Wood

Download | Duration: 00:26:30

Friday, March 26th interview with John Grant & Tim Wood

Download | Duration: 00:26:06

Friday, March 5th, 2010 interview with John Grant and Tim Wood

Download | Duration: 00:29:30

Is this about to happen??

http://www.bestonlinetrades.com/20100224/potential-crash-window-developing-in-the-sp500-index/

So where's inflation?? (excerpted from a John Mauldin article on Safe Haven.com)

So Where's the Inflation?

Now for a series of graphs. First, let's look at the Adjusted Monetary Base (or M0). This is the one monetary aggregate that the Federal Reserve actually controls. Notice that it exploded in the middle of 2008, as the Fed started quantitative easing and pushed rates to zero. They were desperate to try and thaw out the credit markets that had frozen.

That in turn caused M1 to increase.

But the broader measure on money that is M2 rose into 2009 and has then gone sideways. Normally the stimulus of such raw money growth in M0 would have M2 exploding upward, as you get a money multiplier effect.

We all know that a US bank can lend out about nine times the deposits it has on hand. When the Fed puts money into the system, it can be multiplied rather quickly if banks choose to lend. This is called the money multiplier.

"Restated, increases in central bank money may not result in commercial bank money because the money is not required to be lent out - it may instead result in a growth of unlent reserves (excess reserves). This situation is referred to as 'pushing on a string': withdrawal of central bank money compels commercial banks to curtail lending (one can pull money via this mechanism), but input of central bank money does not compel commercial banks to lend (one cannot push via this mechanism)." (Wikipedia)

This described growth in excess reserves has indeed occurred in the financial crisis of 2007-2010, with US bank excess reserves growing over 500-fold, from under $2 billion in August 2008 to over $1,000 billion recently. Look at the chart below. This is what has all the gold bugs salivating. Where else has this happened without hyperinflation?

Now let's turn to our old friend Paul Samuelson and his textbook that we all read in Econ 101 to learn about the money multiplier:

"By increasing the volume of their government securities and loans and by lowering Member Bank legal reserve requirements, the Reserve Banks can encourage an increase in the supply of money and bank deposits. They can encourage but, without taking drastic action, they cannot compel. For in the middle of a deep depression just when we want Reserve policy to be most effective, the Member Banks are likely to be timid about buying new investments or making loans. If the Reserve authorities buy government bonds in the open market and thereby swell bank reserves, the banks will not put these funds to work but will simply hold reserves. Result: no 5 for 1, 'no nothing,' simply a substitution on the bank's balance sheet of idle cash for old government bonds."

-(Samuelson 1948, pp. 353-354)

And that is what has happened. And all those mortgage bonds and other assets the Federal Reserve has purchased? They have been put right back into the Fed by the banks. There has been no money multiplier. In fact, the money multiplier, as measured by the ratio of MO to M1 growth is at its lowest level ever. Look at the graph below:

What this graph shows, astonishingly, is that a dollar added to the monetary base now has a NEGATIVE multiplier effect. Without showing yet another chart, bank lending has fallen percentagewise the most in 67 years. The actual amount of bank loans is falling each and every quarter, with no signs of a bottom. Consumers are reducing their debt and leverage. Bank loans are being written off at staggering rates. Over 700 banks (I think that is the figure I saw) are officially on watch by the FDIC, with more banks being closed each week.

No Help for Homebuilders

Before we close, this note from Mark Hanson about the home-building market:

"In January, builders sold a whopping 1000 houses per day nationally. During the same month, Foreclosures rang up at 4300 and Notice-of-Defaults at 5100 per day nationally. What a mess. I really thought earlier in the year with massive mortgage rate and tax stimuli -- and the purposeful lack of distressed inventory due to HAMP and other mortgage mod and foreclosure prevention initiatives -- that builders had a shot at some volume.

Is 2010 a candidate for a four year low?

The markets have done what they do best the last few days, frustrate the majority. Bearishness had risen dramatically heading into the February 5th low. The tide had turned in a hurry. But in the last two weeks the market has been resilient, rising and seemingly on its way to new highs. The bears have been running for cover, just as the bulls had been just 3 short weeks ago. Then today happened.

The stage is now set for a serious decline in stocks, and probably other asset classes as well. The only question is will it unfold that way. After today it looks more likely.

The cycles I follow call for a move to new lows (below the Feb lows) by the end of March. Then an important retest of the highs should occur. If that fails, then it really gets serious.

One thing that occurred to me recently is that 2010 COULD be a 4 year cycle low. You get there by simply counting 1990, 94, 98, 2002, 2006, 2010. etc. But sometimes cycles expand and contract. In fact Tim's work suggests the March 09 low was an extension of the 4 year cycle low due in 2006, which would make it the longest 4 year cycle on record. So is it possible to have another extreme low late in 2010, less than two years after the last 4 year low? I think it might be.

My rational is that it would make perfect sense to have the longest 4 year cycle on record followed by the shortest 4 year cycle on record, which is what we'd have if another low occurred this year. That would get the 4 year cycle count back on track. Could that be what the possible 3 of 3 is suggesting will unfold? It would take a seriously powerful, rapid decline to make that happen, but that's what a 3 of 3 would be, right?

Could it be that simple?  I don't know. I'm just saying.....maybe.

What I do know is that the market looks vulnerable tonight. So be on alert.




Friday, February 19, 2010 interview with John Grant and Tim Wood

Download | Duration: 00:30:52

Uptrend about to be tested

Since warning about a possible upside surprise in my last entry, the market has done just that, closing above the critical 1105 level today. Then, after the close, Chairman Bernanke and Co. raised the discount rate in a surprise move to .75%.

It wasn't a surprise that they did it. They telegraphed as much in their latest ramblings. The surprise was that they did it between meetings. This may be a preemptive strike against an overheated CPI report that will come out Friday morning. The Fed gets those numbers early. Whatever the reason, this changes the environment a bit.

I'm aware of the Elliott 3 of 3 of something count that everyone's watching....and that's the problem. Everyone's watching it, and expecting it. That's usually not a great recipe for it actually happening. Sort of like that H&S pattern everyone saw in July. Remember that one?

So we're about to find out if it's a valid count. If the market holds up and moves higher in the next few days after this Fed action, it'll be signaling to me that the top is a ways off yet. If this happens, don't make the mistake of saying the market's wrong. The market is never wrong. Only traders are wrong....whenever they're aligned against the market.

So be open and don't dig your heels in. If the 3 of 3 is here, it'll be obvious very soon. If not, go with the market you have, not the one you want.