Home Page

Introduction

Historical Results and Commentary

Portfolio Analysis

 

May 11, 2004

 

 

Holdings

 

 

May-04

1

F

2

NBG

3

YHOO

4

NKE

5

BA

6

VRSN

7

JDSU

8

CAT

9

JNJ

10

NSM

11

CA

12

FNF

13

MWD

14

TKC

15

HMC

16

CRYP

17

X

18

AAPL

19

COP

20

WB

 

 

Performance of Individual Stocks For last 3 months

 

May-04

 

FNF

-14.77%

COP

7.78%

CAT

-6.98%

NKE

-7.50%

BA

-2.96%

VRSN

-4.83%

JDSU

-37.30%

YHOO

11.83%

JNJ

1.33%

NSM

8.75%

CA

-1.22%

F

-1.13%

MSFT

-4.45%

TKC

-6.31%

HMC

-7.08%

CRYP

24.67%

X

-24.15%

AAPL

14.03%

NBG

2.39%

WB

-4.28%

 

 

 

Total Increase (Decrease) since last quarter: -2.61

Additions:  MWD

Subtractions: MSFT

Commentary

I think Microsoft is at a sustainable level of equilibrium for the near future.  MWD was added as a timing play, as I expect the general investment banking business and the broader financial services business to expand in the next few years.

 

Last quarter I wrote about asset bubbles.  This quarter I want to talk about the bubble that is going to shape the next 20 years of American history – the housing bubble.  I am convinced that we are currently in the process of inflating one of the greatest asset bubbles in history – in the housing market.  My criteria is a personal one more than an objective one.  As someone who is about to be an Ivy League grad1, I see no possibility of owning my own house in a major metropolitan area given the current levels and trajectories of housing prices.  Now, I don’t mean to be elitist, but if someone in my position cannot afford a home, what about the vast majority of Americans that have a lower earnings potential and more expenses than someone who has had the luck and fortune I have had?  I also think the notion that houses are still affordable for a 2-income family is somewhat bogus, as there are many people who live alone, and with the increasing failure of marriages and growing acceptance of alternative lifestyles in this country, the number is only going to get higher. 

 

I am also concerned that the housing bubble has been created by a sustained period of low interest rates over the past decade or so.  While deflationary pressures from globalization have kept many consumer prices down, thereby allowing for low interest rates, I fear much of the excess liquidity created by this monetary policy is ending up in the housing market, creating the boom/bubble we are now seeing.  Should interest rates rise drastically, many people are going to be priced out of the market.  Also, those with adjustable rate mortgages, especially those of questionable credit quality, are going to get a rude awakening as to the workings of financial markets, and lenders that are neglecting tried and true standards for originating loans are going to learn what happens when they focus on loan quantity not loan quality.  This is not to say I am not impressed by the growth of asset backed securities and the ability to remove loans from balance sheets – this is a major and revolutionary change in financial engineering that creates even more liquidity for mortgage lending and takes much of the risk out of the equation for lenders.  But if lenders no longer feel the consequences of their lending decisions, who is going to make sure they are lending responsibly? 

 

What really concerns me about the housing bubble is that many Americans have replaced a policy of personal savings with assuming increases in the prices of their homes are permanent.  After all, who needs to save when the housing market is increasing your net worth for you?  When prices fall, as they will sometime in the next 5-7 years, a lot of people are going to start feeling poorer, and they are going to start saving more and spending less.  Lower consumer spending is not going to be pretty for the US economy. 

 

Finally, I think there are two end-game scenarios for the housing bubble.  First, I think the current housing market bubble could show us a new paradigm for handling market liquidity.  In previous years, I feel inflation may have been more evenly distributed through asset classes and market goods.  Now I think we have entered a phase where we will see inflation build-up more in non-tradable goods than in global products2.  As a consequence, old measures of inflation will not work, since we will still have one currency used to purchase both local and global goods.  In this segmented market, relative prices will get a bit wacky3.  However, I think bubbles will build in non-tradable goods, which will serve as a repository for the market’s excess liquidity.  Then these bubbles will burst, destroying the excess liquidity and brining the economy back to an equilibrium level of wealth in a given market. 

 

The second scenario is that the housing bubble could be a watershed event in American society that further divides rich and poor.  The natural state of a free-market capitalist society like America is between 2-classes, the haves and the have-nots, and perhaps housing ownership will become a luxury rather than a perceived right in the future.  We could be in the process of shifting the poor in this country into tenant relationships by pricing them out of the housing market.  I think the social repercussions of the housing boom are only poorly understood right now, and will have profound impacts on our country in the coming years.

 

 

 

1If I can finish my *#$%@)@# thesis! 

2Given the level of national debt in the country, and the effect higher interest rates will have on interest payment obligations for the government, I feel the Federal Reserve will be willing to use outdated and imperfect measures of inflation rather than force the burden of higher interest payments on the nation (or on the presidency of the person who appointed them).  However, should there be a dearth of buyers of US treasury securities, interest rates are going to have to rise.  The hand that rocks the interest rate cradle is increasingly becoming the buyers of US treasuries, not the federal reserve. 

3 Don’t fool yourself, the growth of ‘organic’ grocery stores that charge twice the price of Stop-N-Shop is not so much a response to changing market preferences as it is a convenient way for the food market to exploit excess liquidity.  Well, that is my opinion at least.

 

Back to Quarterly Commentaries

 

 

Home Page

Introduction

Historical Results and Commentary

Portfolio Analysis