Another round of bloodletting

October 24, 2008 – 9:26 am

by Rolfe Winkler, CFA

Stock market futures have triggered circuit breakers this morning, down the maximum they are allowed before the open.  The SPX suggests the S&P will open down 9%.  Everything is getting hammered in pre-market trading.  Japan’s Nikkei was off 10% overnight to 7649. It had been over 18,000 just over a year ago. Britain announced a lower than expected GDP number, off 0.5% in the third quarter.

(Update: at 9:37, the Dow is down a little over 400.  And it’s coming back.  So who knows, we may actually end up today….though I doubt it.)

People are saying a lot of this is forced selling.  There are too many overlevered players that have to sell everything to raise the cash they need to pay back investors.  I guess that’s as good a reason as any for the violence in the markets.

The trade out of commodities and into the dollar continues as my college friend Becky Jarvis is reporting on CNBC. Oil is down below $63, the Pound and Euro are getting clobbered as the dollar spikes.

Right now Treasuries and the dollar are a refuge, but what happens when there’s the inevitable reversal out of the dollar and dollar-based assets?   Brad Setser published a fascinating piece a couple days back about the fundamental reversal of capital flows that have driven the world’s economies for decades. In a nutshell that relationship has been that they give us stuff, and we give them dollars, which they lend back to us to buy more of their stuff.

But what if they’re no longer benefiting from this trade flow and are forced to reverse it. What if they lose so much money on the dollar assets they’re holding that they decide to stop holding them? In the case of China, for instance, Brad quotes the following:

“Charles Dumas of Lombard Street Research estimates that China makes 1-2 per cent on its (largely) dollar reserves. It then loses up to 10 per cent on the exchange rate and suffers a Chinese inflation rate of 6 per cent for a total real return in renminbi of about minus 15 per cent. That is a loss of $270bn a year, or a stunning 7-8 per cent of gross domestic product.

When the Chinese decide it’s too expensive to keep recycling their dollars back into the U.S., what then? We could see a spike in U.S. interest rates as the demand for U.S. debt can’t come close to meeting supply.  Where do people think the money is going to come from to fund trillions of dollars of bailouts and “stimulus?”

It has to be borrowed, which means we have to sell more Treasury bonds and hope people will buy them.  Right now they are, because they perceive Treasuries as a safe haven in a violent market.  But it’s my belief that, eventually, the supply of Treasury bonds will vastly outstrip demand to buy them.

That is to say, our need for borrowed money will eclipse the rest of the world’s ability to provide it. That will lead to higher interest rates and possibly a run on the dollar.

It’s been said that the Chinese have to keep this reciprocal relationship going.  They have no choice.  If you owe the bank a little bit of its money, they own you.  But if you owe them all of their money, you own the bank.  But that sentiment ignores the obvious truism that unsustainable things do not sustain themselves. We may own the Chinese, but if we go bankrupt, so do they.  This Ponzi game we have going with them, where we spend to infinity and they lend to infinity, is just not sustainable forever.  It will reverse.

Maybe not today, maybe not tomorrow, but soon and–possibly–for the rest of our lives.

  1. 6 Responses to “Another round of bloodletting”

  2. I’ve seen analysis (Stratfor) indicating it’s the unwinding of the Yen carry trade that is causing all the market turmoil. Seems as good an explanation as any.

    By GRL on Oct 24, 2008

  3. An insurance company pools premiums to create a fund that can cover losses by some of those premium payers.

    It now appears that the gov’t is an insurance company that is telling us, “we don’t care how much is provided by premiums (taxes), we are going to cover everyone” This can’t work, yet, as Rolfe says, so far it has because the country that is making this pledge is perceived as the safest bet.

    When it reverses, talk about whiplash! Isn’t the government in the process of leveraging without calling a limit and isn’t leverage to blame for the mess to begin with? When the rug gets pulled out there will be nothing to cushion the fall.

    All it will take is the simple declaration, “no, I don’t want that dollar.” and all that keeps us afloat to date is the response, “If you don’t, then what will you take instead?”

    We’ve always tried to make the case that globalization was good for all. Right now, it appears to have saved the day, but only the day, even as it drags everyone down to varying degrees.

    By CB on Oct 24, 2008

  4. the more interesting question is how to make money on the proper interpretation of events. I have large leveraged short positions on emerging markets, obviously they are doing great. And large precious metal holdings. I guess the real question is at what price to take leveraged metal positions.

    By marc on Oct 24, 2008

  5. no matter what happens next, the economy for some miraculous reason bounces back (fed worries about inflation) or the more realistic scenario of the Chinese saying no more free money (not enough buyers), rates HAVE to go up. Try ticker: TBT, 2x short the 20yr treasury

    By EV on Oct 24, 2008

  6. So I finally figured out that this whole financial situation is explained by the movie “Animal House”

    See how at:

    http://watchingmarcitz.wordpress.com/the-financial-bailout-according-to-animal-house/

    By Marc I on Oct 25, 2008

  7. A deflationary bust seems to be the likely consequence of the implosion of the Real Estate market. That would, and has been, a boon to the treasury securities. Did anyone notice that the 30 year bond dipped down near 3.9% Friday? “Cash” (U.S. dollars) are king, but for how long? When the worm turns maybe the TBT will be the security ro own. It’s designed to be the inverse of long Treasuries.

    By jd on Oct 25, 2008

Post a Comment