Other than availing flights and tour packages with TAM Viagens, the tourism provider for TAM Airlines, Multiplus Fidelidade members will now be able to accumulate points by purchasing products and services at Ipiranga gas stations and by shopping at Wal-Mart stores. Members would also be able to redeem prizes at these partners' sales outlets.

Km de Vantagens and Bomclube will raise the customer base of Multiplus Fidelidade from 6 million members to nearly 12 million. Management believes that Multiplus will prove to be an efficient tool for establishing customer loyalty and retaining consumers at favorable costs for all the partners.

TAM is making use of every method to ensure growth. Recently, it signed an agreement with Air Canada that will allow members of TAM Fidelidade and Air Canada’s Aeroplan programs to earn and redeem frequent flyer points/miles on flights operated by either company.

In May, TAM Viagens invested in updating its line of products and services in order to offer a more personalized service to its customers. However, growing competition in the Latin American airline industry and recent surge in oil price to $72 per barrel are matters of huge concern.

Nevertheless, recent recovery in the Brazilian real against US dollar will definitely reduce interest expenses and make international air travel cheaper for Latin Americans. Thus, we are Neutral on the stock.

The same activity, undertaken in Russia or China in the not-too-distant past, could easily lead to a bullet in the head, or at least a 10-year stretch in the gulag.

For those of us trading in the “free” markets of the West, it’s just a matter of money. Unfortunately, getting stung by having the rules of the game changed when you’re already set in a trading position is a painful reality. It happened to me last July when I had a short position in JP Morgan shares, and the SEC’s emergency order against “naked” short selling (whatever that is) in the securities of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and 17 primary dealers caused a huge price spike in all those companies’ shares.

The US$10 jump in JP Morgan’s shares that resulted was enough to blow through my stops, turning a decent profit into a loss. Tough luck for me, but it’s still galling in hindsight, when you see that those short-selling restrictions didn’t do a whole lot of good for investors in Lehman Brothers, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, to name three of the companies on the list, and the reason for the introduction of the rules was given as the need to prevent downward pressure on the banks’ share prices.

So when you see the CFTC start to take a look at position limits in futures for all “commodities of finite supply”, watch out. Incidentally, the only commodity I can think of that is not in finite supply is helicopter Ben Bernanke’s US dollar, but I suppose it’s too much to ask for the US authorities to turn that tap off.

We’ll have to wait a bit longer to see what the CFTC comes up with, but if they are in the business of trying to stop energy price “manipulation”, why don’t they take a look at the oil price recommendations put out by Goldman Sachs since the beginning of last year?

To recap, the US bank forecast a “super spike” in the price of crude to $150-200 a barrel last May, not long before the oil price hit a peak of $147. Then, in January this year, the bank predicted a dip in prices to below $30 a barrel, just before the bottom in the crude price. On 4 June, it raised its 2009 price forecast to $85 a barrel, showing uncannily wrong timing again, since the price of WTI crude has since fallen back from over $73 a barrel to the current $60.

Suggestions that the bank has been saying one thing and trading in the opposite direction itself are not new—Forbes ran a story on this a few months ago—but are notoriously difficult to prove. Let’s just say that, if the bank’s proprietary traders had been following their own analysts’ advice, it’s unlikely that the press would be talking about record bonuses in 2009 for Goldman employees.

I’m not holding my breath that the regulators will even turn an eye to this—after all, conflicts of interest in large securities firms have long been endemic. Unless regulators are willing to bite the bullet and fully separate trading and investment banking activities from advisory ones, markets can hardly be seen as a level playing field. Eliot Spitzer had a go at changing things a few years ago, but with little success.

From past experience, unfortunately, complaints against “speculators” are likely to be used as an excuse to favour one group of market participants over another. And the small guys that invest in index-tracking products are unlikely to wield the same clout as the big players in determining how these rules are set.

Chicago, IL - June 26, 2009 - Zacks Equity Research highlights Cirrus Logic, Inc. (CRUS) as the Bull of the Day and CEMEX, S.A. de C.V. (CX) the Bear of the Day. In addition, Zacks Equity Research provides analysis on Mack-Cali (CLI), Liberty Properties (LRY) and Cousins Properties (CUZ).

Full analysis of all these stocks is available at http://at.zacks.com/?id=2676.

Here is a synopsis of all five stocks:

Bull of the Day:

Cirrus Logic, Inc. (CRUS) is a fabless OEM of analog, mixed-signal and digital processing integrated circuits (ICs). The company's 4Q results were in line with our expectation.

On the positive side, CRUS reflects a strong balance sheet with no debt. The company has also provided decent 1Q 2010 guidance. Cirrus' new product offerings are expected to benefit end customers.

The seismic product line remains a strong growth area and should help increase revenue going forward. This group should maintain its growth even after factoring in the changes in oil price. Our recommendation remains a BUY with a price target of $5.50.

Bear of the Day:

We are keeping our Sell rating on CEMEX, S.A. de C.V. (CX). The company posted weak results in the first quarter of 2009 with net income of just US$3 million.

The continued weak cement volumes in Spain and U.S. are problematic. The short-term outlook for the company remains highly uncertain based on the downtrend in the residential, industrial/commercial and the infrastructure sectors as well as due to the fall in the real estate prices throughout the world. Moreover, the recent lawsuit filed against the company is problematic.

However, all efforts to reduce its costs and net debt in 2009 are encouraging. Nevertheless, the current credit crunch and the recession in the U.S. are matters of huge concern.

Latest Posts on the Zacks Analyst Blog:

Commercial Real Estate Plunging

The reason why the value of CRE is falling is not a mystery. If stores are closing, then they will not be paying rent, and landlords will not be in a position to get rent increases from the remaining stores. If a company is laying off lots of people it will have lots of empty cubicles and offices, and will be looking to sublet its existing space, competing directly with the landlords trying to rent out existing space.

In addition, as recently as the second half of last year, construction of new commercial real estate was still very robust, meaning that there is lots of new space that has recently come on line. Still, a 8.6% decline in a single month is startling and is very bad news for REITs like Mack-Cali (CLI), Liberty Properties (LRY) and Cousins Properties (CUZ).

We have already seen commercial delinquencies and foreclosures start to rise, and this will be a major headache for the banks going forward. Many small- and mid-sized banks ($1-10 billion in assets) are very heavily exposed to CRE. This could cause them to be the guest of honor at one of the Friday night pizza parties put on by the FDIC. However, individually these banks do not threaten the financial system the way the stress-tested 19 would if they failed.

Get the full analysis of all these stocks by going to http://at.zacks.com/?id=5507.

About the Bull and Bear of the Day

Every day, the analysts at Zacks Equity Research select two stocks that are likely to outperform (Bull) or underperform (Bear) the markets over the next 3-6 months.

About the Analyst Blog

Updated throughout every trading day, the Analyst Blog provides analysis from Zacks Equity Research about the latest news and events impacting stocks and the financial markets.

About Zacks Equity Research

Zacks Equity Research provides the best of quantitative and qualitative analysis to help investors know what stocks to buy and which to sell for the long-term.

Continuous analyst coverage is provided for a universe of 1,150 publicly traded stocks. Our analysts are organized by industry which gives them keen insights to developments that affect company profits and stock performance. Recommendations and target prices are six-month time horizons.

Zacks "Profit from the Pros" e-mail newsletter provides highlights of the latest analysis from Zacks Equity Research. Subscribe to this free newsletter today by visiting http://at.zacks.com/?id=5508.

About Zacks

Zacks.com is a property of Zacks Investment Research, Inc., which was formed in 1978 by Leonard Zacks. As a PhD in mathematics Len knew he could find patterns in stock market data that would lead to superior investment results. Amongst his many accomplishments was the formation of his proprietary stock picking system; the Zacks Rank, which continues to outperform the market by nearly a 3 to 1 margin. The best way to unlock the profitable stock recommendations and market insights of Zacks Investment Research is through our free daily email newsletter; Profit from the Pros. In short, it's your steady flow of Profitable ideas GUARANTEED to be worth your time! Register for your free subscription to Profit from the Pros at http://at.zacks.com/?id=5509.

Visit http://www.zacks.com/performance for information about the performance numbers displayed in this press release.

Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/ZacksInvestment

Join us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/pages/Zacks-Investment-Research/57553657748?ref=ts

Disclaimer: Past performance does not guarantee future results. Investors should always research companies and securities before making any investments. Nothing herein should be construed as an offer or solicitation to buy or sell any security.

Contact:
Mark Vickery
Web Content Editor
312-265-9380
Visit: www.zacks.com

On the positive side, CRUS reflects a strong balance sheet with no debt. The company has also provided decent 1Q 2010 guidance. Cirrus' new product offerings are expected to benefit end customers.

The seismic product line remains a strong growth area and should help increase revenue going forward. This group should maintain its growth even after factoring in the changes in oil price. Our recommendation remains a BUY with a price target of $5.50. Zacks Investment Research

In the WSJ Blog Environmental Capital, Russell Gold writes of

a growing belief that the economy could be regaining its footing and oil prices will climb to the price that OPEC is willing and able to defend.... "[T]here would be no reason why the current price rally could not extend to $75 within a fairly rapid timeframe," [Paul] Horsnell wrote in his weekly overview of oil-market conditions. Believers in oil-market fundamentals are left scratching their heads. Exxon Mobil Corp. chairman and chief executive Rex Tillerson told reporters earlier this week that he couldn't see any reasons involving supply and demand to push up oil prices. He attributed the recent oil rally to fluctuations in the U.S. dollar and people trying to get in front of a perceived economic recovery.

The first point I'd emphasize about this hypothesis is that the recovery people are talking about isn't necessarily in the U.S., Europe, or Japan. Developments in those countries are not what have been driving the oil market in recent years. These regions reduced their consumption of oil by almost 800,000 barrels per day between 2005 and 2007, a time when the price of oil was booming. The increases in demand over that period came instead from places like China, India, and the Middle East.

Change in petroleum consumption (in million barrels per day) between 2005 and 2007. Data source: EIA.

And, as Dave Cohen notes, the additional drops in consumption from the major industrialized countries since the start of 2008 have been quite remarkable. U.S. oil consumption in the first three months of this year averaged 18.8 million barrels per day, almost 2 mb/d below the value for 2007:Q1. Japan's real GDP fell at a 15% annual rate in the first quarter, and its overall oil product output for April was 14% below year-earlier values, though the April measure of Japan's industrial production showed a sharp gain. GDP declines in Europe also exceed those in the United States.

So to the extent that oil speculators see any green shoots, perhaps they're in the nature of Asian bamboo rather than American prairie grass. Chinese oil consumption was up 4% in April, though that was the first year-on-year gain for them in 6 months. India's oil consumption also seems to be growing. But so far those gains are well below the drops seen in the U.S. and elsewhere.

Whatever recent developments in Asia may mean for the future, there is a physical product being produced and consumed in the here and now at a price that Friday moved above $66/barrel. If that price is such that the current quantity produced exceeds the current quantity demanded, it would have to show up as an addition to storage, either as inventory build-up, or, as Dave Cohen emphasizes, held in tankers at sea. The graph below plots the behavior of U.S. crude oil inventories over a typical year, along with what actually happened in 2008 and so far in 2009. The fact that inventories were significantly below average in the first half of 2008 is one of the indicators to me that you can't attribute the whole run-up at the time to speculation.

U.S. crude oil stocks, excluding SPR, in thousands of barrels. Bold line: average over 1990-2007. Red: 2008. Turquoise: 2009. Data source: EIA.

By contrast, so far this year inventories have been well above average. Futures prices had exceeded spot prices by enough until recently that there was a risk-free profit to be had from buying at spot, storing the product physically, and hedging by selling futures. Had it not been for the added demand for oil coming from inventory accumulation, the price would have fallen further. Nevertheless, it is interesting that U.S. inventories have been coming down significantly during May, the same month when oil prices started to rise significantly, although inventory levels remain above average. Here's Dave Cohen's conclusion:

Physical traders storing oil will start dumping it back on the market. They will need to dump it all or pile up losses leasing supertankers. The ensuing snowball will cause the oil price to crash. Oil may fall below its February low as today's distorted $62 price becomes tomorrow's distorted $25 price.

China's demand may or may not be about to resume its spectacular growth, but if not now, in a few years surely. Anyone who sells oil now at $25 rather than wait a few years would in my opinion be throwing their money away.

Then there's that question of inflation. If you think that current U.S. budget deficits raise a significant risk of future inflation-- and I do-- a long position in commodities is one way you might want to hedge against that. Granted, oil's price is rising in every currency, not just dollars, though the inflation risk is not by any stretch confined to the United States. It seems unlikely to be a coincidence that these moves in commodity prices coincided with a surge in long-term U.S. nominal yields, a surge that is not matched by TIPS, though the gap between the two (the implied expected inflation rate) is still smaller than I can explain.

Source: FRED.

Maybe prospects for near-term real growth, particularly in Asia, have improved. Maybe expectations of inflation have been creeping up. Or maybe, as Dave argues, speculators have gotten ahead of the reality of the first two. But oil stores for quite a while, particularly if you just leave it in the ground. Anyone with oil to sell should be looking not months but years ahead.

Perhaps those crazy speculators are doing just that.

Technorati Tags: oil, oil prices

When I first began working on my Ph.D. dissertation in 1980, I was intrigued by the fact that the oil embargo of 1973-74 and the collapse in Iranian oil production after the revolution in 1978 were both followed by global recessions. But when I called attention to the fact there had been a sharp increase in the price of oil prior to 6 of the 7 postwar U.S. recessions up to that point, the general response was one of skepticism.

By the time I was presenting evidence of this relation at various seminars in 1981-82, the Iran-Iraq War had produced yet another shock to world oil markets and the NBER declared that the U.S. experienced a new recession immediately on the heels of the previous downturn, meaning that the evidence had now become that 7 out of 8 recessions had followed oil price increases. That research was subsequently published in the Journal of Political Economy in 1983 and the Energy Journal in 1985. My ideas about how this relationship might be explained by disruptive changes in the composition of spending appeared in the Journal of Political Economy in 1988.

We received some more evidence on this relationship when Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in August 1990, causing oil prices once again to double and coinciding with the 9th postwar recession. The price of oil also shot up before the 2001 recession. Add in the conjunction of the oil shock of 2007-08 with our current economic pickle, and my count is now up to 10 out of 11.

For the record, my position has never been that oil prices were the sole cause of all of these recessions. But the evidence persuaded me that oil must have been a contributing factor in at least some postwar recessions.

Given my long interest in this area, the Brookings Institution approached me about the possibility of writing a paper on the causes and consequences of the oil shock of 2007-08. In that paper I compared what happened last year with what we'd seen in the many previous episodes. I presented those findings at a Brookings conference earlier this month, and described some of the results for Econbrowser readers here and here.

One of the things I did in that paper was to examine a number of different models of the effects of oil prices on the economy that had been developed for earlier data, and look at what those models would have predicted to happen in 2007-08. My conclusion was that most of those models held up pretty well. Using any of the estimates surveyed, the oil shock of 2007-08 was big enough to have made a material negative contribution to real GDP over the period 2007:Q4 to 2008:Q3, and the details of what happened over that period are quite consistent with the predictions.

The reason that I think this is an interesting finding is that this period-- 2007:Q4 to 2008:Q3-- was when the U.S. entered recession #11. The fourth quarter of 2008 saw a very dramatic deterioration in all the economic indicators, but if you focus just on the first 12 months of the recession-- 2007:Q4 to 2008:Q3-- things wouldn't have had to be much better before most analysts would have said that the economy was not even in a recession prior to 2008:Q4. For example, real GDP actually grew by 0.7% between 2007:Q3 and 2008:Q3.

Dave Cohen argues that the GDP figures are too optimistic, and I agree. But whatever your preferred measure might be, it wouldn't take much to nudge 2007:Q4-2008:Q3 into a range that's not usually associated with recessions. For example, gross domestic income on average fell by -0.45% over 2007:Q4-2008:Q3. My paper calculated that using any of the models surveyed this would have been a positive number if there had not been the contractionary effects of the oil shock. Alternatively, a 12-month drop in total employment is sometimes used as another indicator of whether the economy is in a recession. We crossed that threshold in the summer of 2008. But if we had not shed 150,000 jobs in auto manufacturing-- job losses that I think were pretty clearly tied directly to the oil price shock-- employment growth would still have been positive going into the fall of 2008.

Comparison of the effects on auto industry employment of the oil shocks of 1990 and 2007-08. Graph shows cumulative change in the number of workers employed in motor vehicles and parts manufacturing in months subsequent to July 1990 (red) and July 2007 (blue).

Why does it matter whether, in the absence of the oil shock, the experience over 2007:Q4-2008:Q3 might have been a bit better in terms of such measures as GDP or employment? My answer is that the drops in overall spending that were caused by higher oil prices proved to be the knockout punch for an economy that was already wobbly. Whatever your preferred culprit might be for our current difficulties-- loan default rates, falling house prices, debt burdens, or pessimistic sentiment-- that measure would have had a more favorable value going into the fall of 2008 if we had experienced more favorable fundamentals in terms of income and jobs over 2007:Q4-2008:Q3. And there's no question that more favorable fundamentals are exactly what we would have had if the price of oil had never gone over $100 a barrel.

The fact that the biggest drop in output didn't occur until well after the oil price went up, and resulted not from the oil price itself but instead from the interaction with other factors and the dynamic forces unleashed when the overall level of economic activity began to decline, is also exactly the same pattern we saw in each of the previous recessions.

Was the oil shock of 2007-08 the sole cause of the recession? Certainly not. But did it make a material contribution? In my opinion, the answer unquestionably is yes.

You can also find a lot more discussion over at theoildrum.com ([1], [2], [3]).

Technorati Tags: oil, oil prices, oil shocks

The deteriorating global economic scene is continuing to weigh on the outlook for oil demand. And while there are other forces at play as well (the financial crisis and dollar's strength, to name just two), the shaky foundation of the commodity's demand has been the most significant factor in the roughly $100 fall in oil price since July '08.

Given this backdrop, recent projections from the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Energy Information Administration (EIA) provide useful data points. The former is the energy watchdog of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), while the latter is basically the statistical arm of the U.S. Department of Energy.

Here are some of the key points from both reports.

• Both the agencies see global oil consumption falling in 2008 -- the IEA expects total global consumption to drop by 200,000 Bbl/d [barrels per day], while the EIA is looking for a 50,000 Bbl/d drop. This would be the first drop in global oil demand since 1983.
• There is a clear divergence between the two agencies on next year's demand -- the EIA sees a 450,000 Bbl/d drop, while the IEA expects next year's demand to be up by 400,000 Bbl/d.
• The divergence reflects different views of the global economy -- The EIA forecast reflects the global GDP growing by 0.5% next year (slashed from 1.9% last month), while the IEA's outlook is based on IMF projections of ~3% growth next year. On the whole, both the agencies see contracting economic output in the OECD markets and a fair amount of resilience in the emerging world, with the IEA more optimistic of the two.
• On the supplies front, non-OPEC supplies are projected to drop this year but grow next year, with the primary growth markets being Azerbaijan, Brazil and the U.S. Key risks to non-OPEC supplies include the usual suspects (project delays and unexpected disruptions), falling oil prices and the impact of capital markets turmoil.
• OPEC is scheduled to meet again on December 17 to evaluate its earlier announced cuts of 1.5 million Bbl/d. While it's difficult to evaluate the level of compliance precisely, the overall weak market conditions point towards a high degree of compliance. As a result, excess production capacity has been steadily going up -- expected to reach 4 million Bbl/d next year, double the 2007 average.

We expect prices to start consolidating around current levels, though we concede that negative indicators on a number of key variables -- particularly the duration and extent of the U.S economic downturn and the demand outlook in the non-OECD markets -- could further strengthen the downward bias.

OPEC President Chakib Khelil said Sunday that the oil cartel may have to wait until December to take action to reach an oil price of $70 to $90 a barrel, since the impact of its latest supply cuts was not clear yet.

But OPEC’s emergency cut that began November 1 “did not mop up excess supply in the market - and another cut in December … may need the cooperation of non-OPEC members to have any teeth,” said Thomas Hartmann, of Altavest Worldwide Trading.

In the meantime, “the continued rumblings of OPEC moving…

This from The Rude Awakening:

During times like these, it’s all too easy to become caught up in the moment. Fear is a powerful emotion. As the markets continue to crumble, many investors lose sight of their goals. They sell positions indiscriminately; they become irrational.

The sell-off we’re experiencing right now is global. And no stock or commodity has escaped the devastation. That’s why we’re looking at a scarce and valuable resource for steady long-term…

This from The Rude Awakening:

During times like these, it’s all too easy to become caught up in the moment. Fear is a powerful emotion. As the markets continue to crumble, many investors lose sight of their goals. They sell positions indiscriminately; they become irrational.

The sell-off we’re experiencing right now is global. And no stock or commodity has escaped the devastation. That’s why we’re looking at a scarce and valuable resource for steady long-term…

Don’t expect oil prices to remain at these low levels for long, says Byron King. Demand weakness for crude is temporary. And oil-producing nations cannot sustain their own economies unless oil prices are close to $100 a barrel. Byron says it could be time for investors to slowly build up a position in oil service stocks.

This from Whiskey & Gunpowder:

Along with the market decline, the price of oil has fallen. It’s down 50% within three months. Back when oil hit $147 per barrel in July, I said that the price “ought” to be in the range of $100-110, with the possibility of a drop into the $90s. That’s what the fundamentals told me back then.

Most of the decline in oil…

More from Penny Sleuth:

News that Shell is to halt development of its vast Canadian tar sands project is a sign of changing times in the oil industry – and one that will not be well received at the AIM-listed provider of data to the oil industry, GETECH (LON:GTC). This is a pity because…

Exxon Mobil, the largest U.S. oil company, earned $14.8 billion, or $2.86 per share, a 58% increase from the $9.41 billion, or $1.70 per share it earned in the third quarter of 2007. Exxon Mobil’s record-setting profit was enough to beat analyst expectations of $2.38 a share, according FactSet Research data.

Exxon Mobil beat its own record for the largest quarterly profit for a U.S. company, which it had previously set in the second quarter of 2008 with a gain of $11.68 billion.

Royal Dutch Shell PLC (ADR: RDS.A, RDS.B) also announced third quarter earnings today, beating Bloomberg’s average…

Investors will be utterly confused today about what to fear most. First, you had the nightmare open in New York on Friday. The futures markets were limit down and closed briefly. By the time order was restored to electronic markets, the Dow opened down 6%.

The Dow rallied-if you can call it that-to close down “just” 3.6% on the day. A that point, you could safely say the market was ‘pricing in’ the fear of a global recession, and just what that would mean for corporate earnings. Not…

Platinum was rangebound with a slight down bias, ending at $893/oz., down $5. Overnight, platinum is sharply lower.

Silver bottomed just after the New York open, but then completely diverged from gold, shooting higher into the Globex, and only coming back a little late in the day to close at $10.03/oz., up 30 cents. Overnight, silver is trending lower. (Click here for charts)

It was a day of contrasts among the precious metals, with platinum little changed, gold dropping…

Light, sweet crude for November delivery fell $4.47, or 5.68%, to settle at $74.16 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

The price has now tumbled nearly 50% since peaking at a record-high of $147.27 on July 11. Gas prices have followed suit dropping 25% since breaching $4 a gallon in July. A gallon of regular gas fell by about 4 cents a gallon overnight to a new national average of $3.125, auto club AAA reported.

The credit crisis has emaciated countries around the world,…

Greg Guenthner isn't sweating it.

Oil prices have been caught up in widespread panic selling of recent months. It remains a scarce and essential commodity. This means it is only heading in one direction over the long term.

Greg recommends following oil guru Richard Rainwater's cue and buying into oil stocks with both hands.

This from Penny Sleuth:

When the markets go to hell, it’s all too easy to become caught up in the moment. Fear is a powerful emotion. We all witnessed this firsthand as the market’s decline accelerated. As the markets continue to crumble, many investors lose sight of their goals. They sell positions indiscriminately; they become irrational.

The sell-off we’re experiencing right now is global. And aside from some safe-haven gold buying, no stock or commodity has avoided the bears. That’s why we’re looking at a scarce and valuable resource for steady long-term gains: oil.

One energy guru has recently made a big bet on oil.

He bought back shares of Exxon (NYSE:XOM), ConocoPhillips (NYSE:COP), Pioneer Natural Resources (NYSE:PXD), BP (NYSE:BP) and Statoil (NYSE:STO) — all at rock-bottom prices. We say he bought these shares back because, in a prescient move, this sage sold off every oil stock he owned in May…back when oil was sitting atop $129 per barrel.

A Fresh Oil Investment

Richard Rainwater knew he would be a bit early to the party — and probably miss the top — when he sold his oil investments back in spring. But with a stellar track record including massive gains betting on everything from hospitals to cell phones, he knew gains from his $300 million invested in oil stocks and futures were in jeopardy.

“I just felt that America was not ready for $4 gas and we would see a pause here,” he told Time magazine in June.

Rainwater pulled his billions in profits just before oil’s peak in July. Now, he’s ready to do it all over again, spreading his millions across Exxon, ConocoPhillips and other big-name petroleum pushers.

***********************************

Oil at $150 per barrel and gasoline at $8 a gallon or more…

The oil is running out. It’s as simple as that.

But that’s not what you hear from so-called experts. If you ask government officials, our intelligence agencies and even powerful Wall Street financiers, they tell you the opposite.

They say the Saudis could quickly double their oil production from the current level if they wanted to. And given a few years, they think the Saudis could produce four times as much oil as they do now.

They are dead wrong. Check it out here…

***********************************

Overwhelming Demand Will Prop Oil Prices

Rainwater’s outlook is simple: Increased worldwide demand will continue to push the oil price up in the long term. Rainwater’s not alone, either. Analysts and industry experts — like oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens and OPEC President Chakib Khelil — have been making it perfectly clear…oil’s on the rise again.

On July 11, 2008, oil made a record ascent to $147.27 — a 123% jump in only 12 months.  With oil sitting around $80 right now, oil aficionados like Pickens are bracing for the run-up to come. “The Saudis claim they have more oil; they don’t. The president wasted his time to go to Saudi Arabia, to say, 'Give us more oil.' They can't give any more oil...they're stacking up the money as fast as they can stack it up," warned Pickens in an interview with CNBC.

The allure of oil is hard to refute.

With finite supplies and unquenchable demand, it’s clear why many investment houses put oil above $200 in the near future.

According to Pickens, it’s just a case of an oil-hungry economy overwhelming producers: “Eighty-five million barrels of oil a day is all the world can produce, and the demand is 87 million. It's just that simple. It doesn't have anything to do with the value of the dollar.”

Now is the time to buy oil. The third quarter of 2008 saw the largest drop in oil prices in 17 years.

Now with OPEC slashing its production outlook for the rest of 2008 and 2009, it’s unclear just how long prices will be able to stay under $100.

Source: Prevailing in the Midst of Paranoia

The failure of the bailout “will drop the oil price some more ... because oil traders perceive this will hurt the economy -- and as a result reduce oil demand,” said Charles Perry, of Perry Management.

The bottom for oil prices is probably around $90 now, Perry said, but conceded prices could go lower in the next month or two.

James Williams, of WTRG Economics, caught the general gloom when he wrote that oil futures are “trading on expectations for the economy, and those expectations are not good for the U.S. or Europe … [And] It is increasingly obvious that China, which has been the engine of petroleum demand growth, will not escape the impact of the downturn in the U.S. and Europe.”

Source: Crude Plunges, US, Eurozone, even China Demand Seen Slowing

In fact, the 2008 crisis bears several similarities to the economic breakdown that unfolded almost exactly one decade prior. The first and most obvious is the rapidly plummeting price of oil, the commodity on which Russia's economy floats. While oil prices currently remain well above the lows of a decade ago, current prices have lost significant ground since their July peak of over $147 a barrel, hitting a low in early September of just over $90 (CNN). This sharp volatility proved unnerving for Russia, which produces more oil than any country other than Saudi Arabia. Moscow also relies on exports of natural gas and other commodities, the prices of which have also plummeted from summer highs. Additionally, analysts say the short-term outlook for commodity prices is anything but certain. Major producers worry that failing financial institutions, which had speculated heavily in crude and pushed up prices, could now be forced to rapidly unwind those positions, potentially leading to further price declines. Anders Aslund, a fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, wrote in the Moscow Times that this phenomenon could stretch beyond oil and lead to broader withdrawals of investments in Russian markets.

The fall in the oil price from a July high of $147 a barrel back to $100 has helped expose a fragility in heavily indebted Russian companies, banks and individuals leading to a sudden process of deleveraging and credit restrictions similar to that which has stalked US and European economies for the past year.

Reaction to the Wall Street bailout and frenzied last-minute trading in the oil market sent crude prices soaring by more than $16 a barrel, the biggest one-day jump ever.

The late-day spike, which shoved oil up 16% to $120.92 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange, offered an illustration of Wall Street's hard-to-predict moves amid broad market turmoil.

And here's what really happened.

The most striking thing about yesterday's oil prices was the disparity between different futures contracts. The October contract, which expired yesterday, did indeed settle at $120.92, up more than $16. But oil for delivery in November closed at $109.27, an increase of only $6.62, and longer-forward contracts saw an even more modest increase. Unquestionably what was going on was a short squeeze, in which traders who had sold the October contract short were scrambling to close out their positions before expiration, and having a hard time finding people willing to take the other side.

An $11 gap between October and November oil almost never happens, and with good reason-- it represents an arbitrage opportunity that somebody missed. Anyone with uncommitted oil in storage in Cushing, Oklahoma where these contracts get settled could have profited handsomely by selling that oil to the panicked buyers and covering by buying November oil. So why didn't they?

I'm guessing that part of the answer must be that some of these operators were following rules of thumb which usually work just fine in a properly functioning market, and weren't alert to the profit opportunities at hand. I certainly would not expect a discrepancy of this magnitude to persist for as long as 24 hours.

But another possibility that suggests itself is some degree of local monopoly power in the Cushing market. If you're selling that $121 October oil, you might not be anxious to cook the golden goose by bringing any extra oil to the temporarily thirsty market. This might be a reasonable case for the FTC and CFTC to investigate the mechanics of exactly what happened yesterday.

Although the spike for the expiring October contract was dramatic, the story of actual significance for the economy would be the $6/barrel increase in the price of most of the other contracts. What caused that? In terms of changes that affect the quantities demanded or supplied for the physical product, one could point to several developments. Foremost among these would be the 2% drop in the value of the dollar against currencies such as the euro. To a first approximation, that would mean that the demand curve for the rest of the world (plotted with the dollar price on the vertical axis and quantity demanded on the horizontal axis) shifted up by $2. Other news of potential relevance includes the cutbacks in oil exports from Saudi Arabia, Azerbaijan, and Iraq (hat tip: 321energy). But unquestionably the biggest factor in the 6% surge in oil prices yesterday was a resumption of flows of investment dollars into commodity futures contracts, reflecting fears about inflation and perceived risks associated with alternative investments. We may be entering a phase again in which those speculative flows are an important factor in short-run oil price movements, just as I argued they were last spring.

But to repeat that earlier analysis, ultimately an increase in the price of spot oil, whatever its cause, will have an effect on the physical quantity demanded. Demand is sufficiently price inelastic that the effects of a $6/barrel increase are very modest and would take some time to show up anywhere. But if we'd actually seen the price permanently move to the $130/barrel price that was the intraday high for October oil yesterday, the consequences for quantity demanded would become significant. If physical inventories of oil did not accumulate, if the quantity of oil brought to the market did not decrease, and if the feared inflation and further depreciation of the dollar did not materialize, the oil price would have to come back down, and speculators who bought at $130 would end up with a big loss.

But in the mean time, it could be a wild ride.

Technorati Tags: oil, oil prices, oil demand oil bubble, oil price bubble, oil speculation, inflation, financial crisis

I think it is important to bear in mind here that Russia's economy actually grew at an annual 7.5% in the second quarter, while manufacturing growth was nearer 5%. Which means that in a "newly industrialising country" the weight of industry in the economy is declining. This is obviously unsustainable, since however resource rich Russia maybe, you cannot live from oil alone, especially when your oil output has a ceiling. Basically the more living standards in Russia rise, the less important oil will become as a percentage of GDP, and the more dependent the Russian economy will become on other sectors. This is why the current consumer price and wage inflation levels are no mere trifle.

Obviously the Russian authorities have deperately needed to get a grip on the inflation problem, and this is just what the central bank has clearly failed to do, with the annual rate rising again to 15 percent in August, up from 14.7 percent in July. So one part of the present financial crisis is clearly an institutional crisis of confidence. With the benchmark interest rate at the central bank currently at 11%, Russia has negative interest rates of 4% which obviously make it very easy to fuel a lending driven consumer and construction boom, but very much more difficult to communicate to observers that you actually know what you are doing. So while the fx muscle that the central bank can put to work in the short term to stamp out the present will in all probability work, they are clearly not able to prevent such forest fires breaking out in the first place, and we should, of course, expect more. Brazil's central bank which currently has interest rates at 13.75% while inflation is just over 6% (ie 7.5% positive interest rates) is currently justifiably earning for itself a reputation as Latin America's new Bundesbank, a way in which it would never ocur to anyone to refer to the Russian equivalent. And the comparison I would make with Brazil is not meant idly, since Brazil is, of course, also an oil and resource rich emerging economy.



So it is clear that Russia has special problems, which set what is happening in Russia rather apart from what is currently happening in a lot of emerging market economies.

Rout On The Bourses

Both Russia's MICEX and RTS exchanges remained effectively closed first thing this morning following trading being suspended again yesterday (Wednesday) - they were in fact open for less than two hours - in order to prevent a further sell-off on top Monday's record-breaking falls. The ruble-denominated Micex Stock Exchange did resume some very limited trading at 11:00 this morning, but only limited operations were authorsied - the decision was effectively simply to allow participants to close repurchase deals still outstanding from Sept. 16 and Sept. 17.

Russian stocks have now plunged around 60 percent since their May peak, and while the Micex did initially gain 7.6 percent in initial trading yesterday, this gains were very rapidly erased and then turned negative, as the index plunged as much as 10 percent before a halt was called. Russia's dollar-denominated RTS index stood at 1,058 points when trading was halted, nearly 58 percent down from its peak of 2,498 points reached in May.

Emerging Market Woes

In part Russia's problems only reflect more general "risk aversion" issues which are facing all emerging market economies. Emerging-market stocks have fallen the most in 11 years this week, their currencies have been falling, and the cost of insuring emerging market bonds has rocketed as rising lending rates and tumbling commodities have prompted investors to sell riskier assets.

Every emerging stock market in MSCI indexes has been retreating this month, and the MSCI Emerging Markets Index fell 2 percent yesterday to 768.92 a time, its lowest level since October 2006. The index is now down 19.59% since the start of the month, and 29.27% over the past 3 months.



The Russian MSCI index, in comparison, is down 36.1% on the month, and 54.2% over the past three months.



Of course, to put the recent fall in perspective, this recent fall follows several years of rising stock values, and thus is to some extent cyclical, as can be seen from the 4 year MSCI index chart (below).




Falling Oil Prices


In the forefront of the fall in Russia share prices have been energy stocks, including Russian oil producers like OAO Gazprom and OAO Rosneft, who have declined substantially following the sharp drop in crude prices. Gazprom, the world's biggest natural-gas producer, lost 18 percent to 158.41 rubles in the latest turmoil, while Rosneft, Russia's largest oil company, sank 22 percent to 132.20 rubbles.

Oil prices were down again this morning, after bouncing back somewhat yesterday. Light, sweet crude for October delivery fell 97 cents to $96.19 a barrel in electronic trading on the New York Mercantile Exchange midafternoon in Singapore. Overnight, the contract rose $6.01 to settle at $97.16, after having dropped $10.03 the previous two trading sessions. But the trend is decidedly down, and crude has now fallen more than $50 — or over 35 percent — from its all-time trading record of $147.27 reached July 11.




Urals crude peaked at $140.80 a barrel on July 3, and has fallen about 36 percent to $90.01 since then. Still, the oil price averaged $108.65 a barrel so far this year, compared with $63.54 a barrel January 02 through Sept. 18 last year.


Foreign Exchange Reserves


Evidently the Russian economy is in no evident danger of short term default, and foreign exchange reserves, which stood at $560.3 billion on September 12 (according to data from the Russian central bank) - the third largest globally, after China and Japan - are evidently ample. In addition Russia has a $163 billion SWF (the National Welfare Fund), which is split into two parts, $130 billion in a reserve fund, and $33 billion in the National Wealth Fund (the SWF proper).




Nonetheless, the reserves have dropped quite sharply since early August, and are now down some $37 billion since their August 8 peak, and reserves declined by $13.3 billion to $560.30 billion in the week ended Sept. 12, after falling $8.9 billion in the previous week. About 47 percent of Russia's reserves are held in U.S. dollars, 42 percent in euros, 10 percent in pounds and 1 percent in yen, according to the most recent figures released by the central bank (June 30, 2007.

Part of this reduction in reserves is a result of central bank intervention in support of the ruble, since Russia operates a policy of trying to maintain the currency steady within a trading band set against a basket of euros and dollars. Evgeniy Nadorhsin, a senior economist at Trust Investment Bank in Moscow, estimates that the central bank sold approximately $3 billion in fx reserves last week.


So Where Do We Go Now?

This is very hard to say. Clearly we should expect the economy to slow substantially in the last quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009, as credit conditions tighten for households, and the decline in oil prices restricts revenue flows. As just one indication of the worsening credit conditions we could note that Russian 5-year credit default swaps are trading with a spread of around 253-255 basis points, little changed this week but more than double the level seen before the start of the conflict with Georgia.


On the other hand Russia is hardly the Baltics, so we should not expect the economy to go into a nosedive. A lot depends on the view you take about the future of energy prices. Since my own view is that the global economy will slow down considerably - in addition to the reduction in growth rates we have seen so far this year -following the most recent bout of financial turmoil, and this will serve top bring oil prices down even further, but we should see a floor, at around $80 perhaps.

More importantly I am not expecting a long and deep global recession. Many of those developed economies who are significantly affected by the bursting of their construction booms (and the banking issues which have gone with it) will probably have weak domestic consumer demand for some time, but a solid core of emerging economies may well take off again quite rapidly as we move into 2009.

As we can see in the JP Morgan EMBI+ index (see below), bonds from these economies have taken one hell of a battering in September. Looked at the other way round, the extra yield investors demand to own developing nations' bonds instead of U.S. Treasuries has been going up, and today rose 2 basis points to 4.24 percentage points, the widest spread since September 2004, according to the EMBI+ index. So EM bonds have been taking a battering but they have taken a battering because of nervousness about the implications of a financial crisis in the developed economies, rather that as the result of any inherent problems in their own ones. That is what sets this crisis apart from the 1998 one, and that is what means that the financial markets in these economies will in all probablilty bounce back again quite substantially once all the nervousness dies down. Basically most of these markets are neither "oversold" nor are they "maxed out".

What is interesting about the above chart is the way in which things seem to have really taken a decisive turn for the worst in late August, and it is curious to note on the chart below that the Russian MSCI index also started to deteriorate further starting on or around 2 September (see chart below which is from May 2008 to date). So while the Georgia factor may have made people nervous, other, deeper, structural factors are obviously at work.

And while I am on deep structural factors, and the MSCI Emerging Markets index, I would like to conclude by pointing out that the decline since mid May has been pretty generalised, and in some sense is obviously cyclical. The point is that this fall will at some point hit bottom, after which time we should be ready to see a rebound, as investors move in and snap up what will obviously be seen as very attractive buying opportunities.

Russia likes to think anything the west can do these days, it can do better. Apparently that goes for financial crises, too. Russia’s two stock exchanges have suspended trading two days running, after double-digit falls, for the first time since Russia’s 1998 default. Russia even has its own victim. KIT Finance, a Moscow investment house, confirmed today it was in talks to find a buyer after it failed to make payment on several short-term loans. Russia has undoubtedly exacerbated its market woes through its military adventures in Georgia. But those compounded external factors pushing the Russian market down, including the turn in the oil price, falling commodity prices, a strengthening dollar, and rotation out of emerging markets.

Recently, from the drilling of well known as lara in the northern part of Tupi field, PBR discovered light oil and natural gas, with estimated recoverable volume of 3 to 4 billion barrels of light oil and natural gas. The company's large inventories of development projects are also encouraging. Finally, second quarter 2008 results were better than expected, and the outlook for the following quarters remain quite encouraging, even though lower oil prices exist.

Even without considering some important new discoveries, Petrobras is expected to grow annual volumes by approximately 6% over the next few years. Some months ago Petrobras announced a R$2.1 billion (US$1.1 billion) acquisition of Suzano Petroquimica S.A., an important Brazilian petrochemical group. The company is leading the consolidation process in the Brazilian petrochemical sector.

At current levels, Petrobras ADRs are trading at 9.1x our 2008 earnings estimate, at a premium over the industry mean of 7.6x. PBR is now trading with a premium as a result of its fantastic long-term growth potential. However, the whole industry is now trading with a reasonable discount if compared to the S&P index, due to the recent fall in oil price. Our target price is $60.25.

Read the full analyst report on PBR

``We could be in for a volatile period until there is a resolution to what's going on in Georgia,'' said Vlad Milev, an analyst at Metzler Payden, which oversees $1 billion in East European stocks. ``We are not trading on economic fundamentals or company earnings. We are trading on headline news, and the headlines have been largely negative since the events in Georgia started.''

Russia's ambassador to Moldova, meanwhile, said the country's leaders should be wary of what happened in Georgia and avoid a "bloody and catastrophic trend of events" in the separatist, pro-Russia region of Trans-Dniester. The ambassador, Valeri Kuzmin, said Russia recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia because of "Georgia's aggression against South Ossetia." Trans-Dniester broke away from the former Soviet republic of Moldova in 1990. A war broke out between Moldovan forces and separatists in 1992 leaving 1,500 dead. Trans-Dniester is supported by Russia but is not recognized internationally. Russia has 1,500 troops stationed there to guard weapons facilities.

read more

Executive Summary


India’s latest run of strong economic growth and continuing macroeconomic stability is a tribute the important progress made in recent years in macroeconomic management techniques as well as to an earlier generation of structural reforms. India’s economy has now expanded at an average rate of about 8½ percent for four years running, on the back of rising productivity and sustained investment. Inflation after ebbing in the second half of 2007 has now returned in full force and become one of the most pressing macro problems facing the Indian economy. In fact the record capital inflows which have followed the bout of global financial turbulance and a slowing U.S. economy, while in the long run beneficial, have only served to complicate the application of sound monetary policy. The current account deficit, which had remained modest, is now – on the back of high oil prices, heavy external energy dependence and a growing fiscal deficit – in danger of becoming a matter of concern.

India Needs:

- to bring inflation back under control and to within the central bank “comfort zone”.
- to reduce the growing fiscal deficit
- to extend and substantially upgrade infrastructure

India's Strong Points:

- solid and sustained economy growth, no likelihood a a major slowdown
- significant foreign exchange reserves
- proven human capital resources
- demographic tailwinds blowing strongly in her favour, and for several decades to come


Economic Background

India’s recent macroeconomic performance has been truly impressive, the result of sound macroeconomic policies, steady reforms which have been ongoing since the start of the since 1990s, and increasingly favourable demographic tailwinds. Growth averaged about 8½ percent in the four years through 2007/08, and while it is set to drop to the 7- 8 percent range this year, India will remain one of the world’s fastest-growing economies in 2008. The poverty rate fell from 36 percent in 1993/94 to under 28 percent in 2004/05.

India’s productivity growth has also been rapid when compared with that of other countries. The IMFs September 2006 World Economic Outlook found that India’s total factor productivity growth has averaged about 3⅓ percent in recent years, which within Asia is only exceed by China. Other recent growth accounting exercises have found TFP growth for India in the range of 3.2–3.5 percent for the recent period.

It’s the demography

At the present time some some 31 % of India’s populations are under 15 years of age. Between now and 2015 that proportion isn’t expected to change too much, but after 2015, with fertility nationwide now falling rapidly, the proportion is set to decline continually, with India moving steadily nearer the proportion which is to be found in more developed economies – Ireland, for example currently has some 21% of its population under 15, while in the United Kingdom the equivalent figure is 17%.

What this means is that India post 2015 will see a steep and sustained decline in its child dependency ratio and a steady increase in the proportion of its population who are of working age. In those Asian economies (the so called “Tigers”) who have previously passed through this demographic transition such steep declines in dependency ratios have been found to boost GDP growth incrementally, and substantially. This boost is known as the “demographic dividend”. The process is not a mechanical one, of course, and to get the increment, jobs have to be created for the new entrants into the labour force, and in India’s case these jobs will be needed at something like a rate of 15 million a year. What is really different about India is that the demographers are forecasting a continuing decline in the dependency ratio for a period of 30 years or so, as India's fertility rate - that is, the average number of children a woman expects to have in her life time – (which was standing at 3.8 in 1990) falls from the present national average of 2.9 to levels which in all probability will be well below replacement level.

There is another reason why this demographic change is important and that is that we human beings exhibit variable spending and saving activity at different moments in our life cycle. Basically we tend to save most either when we have just started working and are waiting to establish a family home, or during the latter years of our working lives. Whatsmore having children makes it harder to save wherever we are in the life cycle, and thus reducing the proportion of children in a society will tend – other things being equal – to increase the level of saving.

And, not unexpectedly, India's savings rate as a percentage of GDP has been rising steadily since 2003. It now stands in the region of 33% of GDP – a figure which is comparable to the Asian super-performers, all of whom save at above 30%, with China saving at an astonishing rate of nearly 40%.

This recent savings growth has been driven in India by improvements in the government's fiscal health and a sharp rise in corporate savings, but even if these positive factors should gradually disappear, the decline in the dependency ratio should enable India to hold its savings and investment rate above the 30% mark for the next 25 years at least.

Recent Economic Indicators

The Indian economy continued to expand strongly in the first quarter of 2008, even though growth has now dropped back somewhat from the 10.1% peak reached in Q3 2006. GDP, however, still grew at a pretty solid y-o-y rate of 8.8% in Q1, and indeed output growth was unchanged from the last quarter of 2007. So while the Indian economy is slowing, it is doing so very gradually indeed.

Private consumption continued to grow rapidly in Q1 2008 (13.5%) but gross fixed capital formation dropped back (from an average of 20% y-o-y in the previous 3 quarters to 15% in Q1). Since construction activity was still running at a strong pace (12.6%, the fastest rate since Q2 2006) it would not be unrealistic to assume that spending on machinery and equipment slowed somewhat. This would also follow from the fact that manufacturing growth (5.8%) showed the slowest expansion in many quarters (well down from the 10% average over the previous 3 quarters). Infrastructure development also lagged behind in terms of electricity, gas and water supply growth, which was only up by 5.6%. Indeed utilities output has only grown by an average of around 6% over the last 8 quarters. On the other hand government spending shot up, growing at an annual rate of 22.4%. Hence here we have two of the key themes which continue to preoccupy observers of India’s economy: the slow growth of manufacturing and infrastructure, and the rapidly increasing fiscal deficit.


Both India’s exports and imports were up quite strongly in Q1 (12.7%), and this revival in exports offers some evidence that Indian exporters have now started to benefit from the weaker rupee, which has declined by some 7 percent so far this year. India's export growth accelerated again in June and overseas shipments, which account for about 15 percent of the Indian economy, were up 23.5 percent year on year (reaching a total of $14.66 billion), following a 13 percent gain in May. Imports, however, have been increasing even more quickly, and were up 26 percent (to $24.45 billion) in June, thus widening the trade deficit (as compared to June 2007) to $9.78 billion. The deficit was however down on May's whopping $10.77 billion. India's oil imports in June rose 53.4 percent to $9.03 billion as refiners paid more for crude oil purchased overseas. India relies on imports of oil for three-quarters of its energy needs. Non-oil imports gained 14 percent to $15.4 billion.India has paid an average $8 billion a month for oil imports in the year through June, compared with $5.4 billion in 2007.

India's inflation accelerated again in late July, and hit it highest level since 1995, providing additional evidence to support last week's central bank decision to raise borrowing costs for the third time in two months. Wholesale prices were up 12.01 percent in the week to July 26, after rising 11.98 percent in the previous week.



The Reserve Bank of India raised its repurchase rate by a half-percentage point to 9 percent on 29 July, giving priority to the inflation fight over India's short term growth rate. Indeed many economists consider that the bank may well increase the benchmark rate again in the next three months. The cash reserve ratio was also raised 8.75 to 9 percent and in the statement which followed the decision the bank said it still had "headroom'' to further tighten monetary policy. The bank also increased this year's inflation forecast to 7 percent from the previous range of 5 percent to 5.5 percent.



However while the inflation process in India still has some momentum, as the global economy slows – thus reducing pressure on commodity prices - and monetary tightening reins in domestic demand, India’s inflation peak can not now be far away. Despite constant ups and downs oil prices have been generally falling since hitting the record high of US$147.27 a barrel on July 11, and by August 1st they had dropped around 15 per cent in a mere three weeks. If this trend continues then India should eventually obtain some notable relief and this is why it is so important to maintain strict monetary policy and avoid second round inflation effects at this juncture.


India's industrial production provides the most evident sign of the economic slowdown, with output growing at the slowest pace in more than six years in May as continuing price rises and tightening credit lead consumers to cut back on purchases of items like cars, fridges and other manufactured goods. Industrial output was up 3.8 percent from a year earlier after gaining 6.2 percent in April. Manufacturing, which accounts for about 80 percent of India's industrial production, was up 3.9 percent. Electricity rose 2 percent, and mining grew 5.5 percent. Consumer-goods production increased 7.2 percent.




The Ratings Agencies

One notable recent development has been the decision by ratings agency Fitch to lower India's local currency credit rating. The decision by Fitch to revise India's local currency outlook to negative from stable was based on a perception by the ratings agency of a worsening fiscal position and rising inflation. The assignment of a negative outlook suggests an increase in the sovereign default rate may follow if the problem is not corrected, and this would affect the flow of funds - and hence investment - into India. The new revised local currency rating will be 'BBB-' with negative outlook as against the earlier 'BBB-' with stable outlook.

James McCormack - Head of Asia Sovereign Ratings for Fitch - is quoted as saying the "the revision to the local currency outlook is based on a considerable deterioration in the central government's fiscal position in 2008-09, combined with a notable increase in government debt issuance to finance subsidies not captured in the budget." The rating agency has revised its economic growth forecast for 2008-09 from just under 9% to 7.7%, and this seems to be not unreasonable.

Fitch did, however, continue to affirm India's long term foreign currency Issuer Default Rating (IDR) at 'BBB-' with stable outlook, its short-term foreign currency IDR at F3 and the country ceiling at 'BBB-'. The assignment of a local currency negative outlook thus means that agency has effectively put India on watch with the implication that is the underlying causes (inflation and the underlying dynamics of the fiscal deficit) are not addressed over the next 12 to 18 months, the rating could be subject to downgrade. Obviously this is a warning shot as much as anything else, and an attempt to put pressure on the Indian government.

As regards its external balance India is rather different from many other large emerging economies since while the central bank (which has a high level of independence from government) does intervene in the spot market to try to keep a lid on the rupee’s rise and to built up a “war chest” of international reserves the bank has allowed the currency to rise substantially against the US dollar (while the rupee has fallen in 2008, it appreciated by some 12% against the dollar in 2007).



Foreign Exchange Reserves

India's foreign exchange reserves fell another $504 million - to reach $306.6 billion - in the week ended July 25. Despite the fact that India’s foreign exchange reserves, have increased by $81.3 billion in the last twelve months they have in fact now been falling since May. It could be however that the increase in interest rates and the falling price of oil could now see a reversal in this trend.




The big unknown here is the future movement in the oil price. Despite the recent price easing, India still faces an import bill for crude that may reach $120 billion this fiscal year, compared with $69 billion the year before. This extra burden is about 4% of GDP.

Add the impact of the fiscal deficit to the oil bill, and it is not hard to see that the external deficit could reach 4% of GDP this fiscal year. The IMF In April were forecasting a 3.1% for 2008. Reducing this gap is now becoming a priority, especially given the comparative strictness of the ratings agencies vis-a-vis India. Any future downgrades in credit will only make funding the gap more expensive, and as we have seen attracting the foreign capital necessary to bridge the gap has been becoming harder in recent weeks.




Money Supply and Credit

Short term cash rates have been pushing the 8.5 to 9% range in India of late as liquidity has been tighter due to the significant increase in the cash reserve ratio required by the Reserve Bank of India. Banks credit remains strong and rose by 25.8% in the 12 months through July 18. Total bank deposits rose by 21%, over the same period. At the same time, money supply in India grew 20% in the two weeks ended July 18 from a year earlier, compared with 20.5% in the prior two weeks.

While much of the recent increase in lending is likely to be associated with increased credit needs on the part of the oil companies, it also seems that bank credit to other sectors has been picking up. The Reserve Bank of India is unsurpringly rather concerned about the level of credit growth, especially considering that deposit growth slowed to 21% over the same period.

The Rupee

The rupee appreciated significantly during 2007, raising concerns about the competitiveness of Indian industry. In nominal bilateral terms vis-a-vis the dollar, the appreciation has been particularly notable, reaching successive nine-year highs as it rose about 12 percent over the year. Although the increase has been lower in nominal and real effective terms—only about 7–7½ percent—the appreciation of the effective rupee has taken it out of the historical range in which it fluctuated during most of the last decade




Growth Prospects

On the growth front a large gap has now opened up between the increasingly gloomy views about India’s prospects as seen from abroad, and the relative optimism displayed by a number of internal forecasters. The Centre for Monitoring the Indian Economy (CMIE), in Mumbai, still thinks India will grow by 9.5% this fiscal year, while JPMorgan only anticipates growth somewhere in the region of 7%.



While the CMIE estimate is undoubtedly unduly high for this (calendar) year, with growth more than likely coming in in the 7.5% to 8% range, their optimism is not totally unjustified looking forward to 2009 and 2010. Trend growth in India is surely higher than many conventional analyses tend to hold, and if inflation can be gotten under control India then India may well start to hit double digit growth come 2010, and once it breaks the 10% ceiling, it may well stay above it for some considerable time. This is simply because India has a very large untapped capacity for growth, and it is not unrealistic to anticipate that this capacity can be unleased, especially if institutional reform continues, and the fiscal deficit concerns are addressed.

But things are likely to go down before they bounce back up again, since he tightening in monetary policy will surely achieve the desired effect of slowing aggregate demand and GDP growth further. Also negative global factors are likely to continue to weigh adversely on India’s growth outlook in the short term. Consumption growth has already slowed significantly. Investments growth has also begun to moderate and it is quite probable that the slowdown in the investment cycle will accentuate over the next six months.


Everything really now depends on the outlook for inflation and capital inflows. I believe that Inflation should peak in late summer at levels which are not too far above those we are currently seeing. The rate should then start moderating and we could well be back down at 7% - 8% by the end of the financial year. In part this depends on oil prices, and year on year base effects, and oil and food prices, of course, also partly depend on growth in India and the other key emerging economies. Thus we have a kind of "inbuilt stabiliser", since as the major emerging economies slow, commodity prices ease back, and as this happens the central banks can begin once more to loosen monetary policy, providing a kind of win-win feedback effect, until, of course, commodity prices bounce back again, and they need to start tightening once more.

The key point to grasp in all this is that it is consumers in the heavy energy consumption OECD economies who are going to do the heavy lifting of bearing the pain here, as resources are effectively transferred from their wallets to those of the oil producers, and it is this process, rather than what happens in the emerging economies which is likely to keep a cap on global growth in the coming years.



Outlook on Key indicators

• Following the most recent rate hike market expectations have now solidified towards further interest rate increases in the pipeline. The driving orce here will, as ever, be inflation running above the central bank's comfort zone. Here at Emerginvest we see the Reserve Bank of India being rather more prudent at coming meetings, and we feel the current rate hike cycle may possibly peak at 9.5%. Key factors here will be the behaviour of oil prices, and wages and fiscal policy in India itself with election year approaching.

• The Rupee is likely to continue to be supported by central bank tightening and declining demand for dollars from oil producers as oil prices ease. Also should the Rupee continue to head upwards and inflation start to fall, a win-win process will again be set in motion as investors see the prospect of currency related increasing returns once more opening up. In the great global search for yield there is no better winning strategy than to back a winner. At some point however macroeconomic fundamentals will undoubtedly take over, and as the economy slows and inflation moves down towards the comfort zone (around 5%) the central bank will also move into easing mode pushing the Rupee down in the process. A violent correction however is not expected.

• Obviously, with the domestic credit induced consumer boom now fading, exports are going to become more important than ever for India's headline GDP growth. India's Trade Minister Kamal Nath recently set the target of more than tripling India's share of world trade to 5 percent by the year 2020 from the current 1.5 percent. This is a worthy target, and perfectly realiseable, but it will require India to conduct a substantial infrastructural overhaul and to intruce widespread regulatory reform. In the shorter term India is targeting exports of $200 billion in the current fiscal year, up 28 percent from the $155.5 billion achieved in the previous year. This is attainable – exports were up 23.5% y-o-y in June - but with a deteriorating external environment it will be quite hard work.
  
• GDP growth is expected to moderate in 2008 compared to the levels seen in the last three years but at this point growth projections remain solid (probably 7.5 to 8% in calendar 2008). We certainly see India’s mid term sustainable growth rate as being above the consensus 7%-8% rate once inflation is firmly under control, and expect double digit annual growth rates to be hit in either late 2009 or 2010 depending on the extent to which the global slowdown in 2009 negatively affects India’s GDP growth.

• We expect India's credit ratings to remain broadly stable even as the nation weathers higher oil prices and slowing economic growth – a view which was endorsed in a statement at the start of August by Moody's Investors Service. Moody's has a Ba2 rating on India's long-term, local currency debt, leaving it two levels below investment grade, although it rates India's foreign-currency debt Baa3, the lowest investment level. The downside risk here obviously comes from fiscal laxity, but the authorities in New Delhi are undoubtedly very aware of this.
  

The Reserve Bank of India raised its repurchase rate by a half-percentage point to 9 percent on 29 July, giving priority to the inflation fight over India's short term growth rate. Indeed many economists consider that the bank may well increase the benchmark rate again in the next three months. The cash reserve ratio was also raised 8.75 to 9 percent and in the statement which followed the decision the bank said it still had "headroom'' to further tighten monetary policy.



Inflation accelerated during the week largely because of an increase in the price of pulses, fruits, spices and sugar. Manufactured price inflation was up 10.82 percent in the week ended July 19, compared with a 10.72 percent gain in the previous week.

However while the inflation process in India still has some momentum, as the global economy slows - reducing pressure on commodity prices - and monetary tightening reins in domestic demand, the peak can not now be far away. Light, sweet crude for September delivery rose 90 cents, or 0.7 percent, to $124.98 a barrel yesterday (at the 2:30 pm close of floor trading on the New York Mercantile) but prices have been falling generally since hitting the record high of US$147.27 a barrel on July 11. International oil prices have now dropped around 15 per cent over the last three weeks, and if this trend continues then India should obtain some relief.

This is why it is so important to maintain strict monetary policy and avoid second round effects.



Foreign Exchange Reserves


India's foreign exchange reserves fell another $504 million - to reach $306.6 billion - in the week ended July 25 according to data from the Reserve Bank of India weekly statistical supplement.

Gold reserves were unchanged at $9.21 billion while reserves with the International Monetary Fund fell $2 million to $515 million. The nation’s special drawing rights with the International Monetary Fund held at $11 million. Despite the fact that India’s foreign exchange reserves, have increased by $81.3 billion in the last twelve months they have in fact now been falling since May. It could be however that the increase in interest rates and the falling price of oil could now see a reversal in this trend.





Exports Up In June

Indian exporters have started to benefit from the weaker rupee, which has now declined by 7.3 percent so far this year. India's export growth accelerated in June and overseas shipments, which account for about 15 percent of the Indian economy, were up 23.5 percent year on year to reach $14.66 billion, following a 13 percent gain in May. Imports increased 26 percent to $24.45 billion, widening the trade deficit (as compared to June 2007) to $9.78 billion. The deficit was however down on May's whopping $10.77 billion. India's oil imports in June rose 53.4 percent to $9.03 billion as refiners paid more for crude oil purchased overseas. India relies on imports of oil for three-quarters of its energy needs. Non-oil imports gained 14 percent to $15.4 billion.

India has paid an average $8 billion a month for oil imports in the year through June, compared with $5.4 billion in 2007.

Even though oil prices have now moderated from their peak at around US$145, they still remain quite high by historical standards, hence the further widening in the trade deficit. Each US$10 increase in crude oil prices results in an increase of approximately US$7 billion (or 0.6% of GDP) in oil imports and the trade deficit. High non-oil import growth may also cause further widening of the current account deficit at a time when global capital inflows are slowing. Non-oil imports grew at an average of 24.9% during April-May 2008.

The big unknown here is the future movement in the oil price. Despite the recent price easing, India still faces an import bill for crude that may reach $120 billion this fiscal year, compared with $69 billion the year before. This extra burden is about 4% of GDP.

Add the impact of the fiscal deficit to the oil bill, and it is not hard to see that the external deficit could reach 4% of GDP this fiscal year. Reducing this gap is now becoming a priority, especially given the comparative strictness of the ratings agencies vis-a-vis India. Any future downgrades in credit will only make funding the gap more expensive, and as we have seen attracting the foreign capital necessary to bridge the gap has been becoming harder in recent weeks.

Obviously, with the domestic credit induced consumer boom now fading, exports are going to become more important than ever for India's headline GDP growth. India's Trade Minister Kamal Nath recently set the target of more than tripling India's share of world trade to 5 percent by the year 2020 from the current 1.5 percent. This is a worthy target, and perfectly realiseable, but it will require India to conduct a substantial infrastructural overhaul and to intruce widespread regulatory reform. In the shorter term India is targeting exports of $200 billion in the current fiscal year, up 28 percent from the $155.5 billion achieved in the previous year. This is attainable, but with a deteriorating external environment it will be hard work.


The Rupee


India's rupee was up again this week on speculation the demand for foreign currency from oil refiners would reduce following the decline in crude oil prices. The rupee touched its highest in a week on Friday and advanced 0.5 percent to 42.35 a dollar at the 5 p.m. close in Mumbai.


The rupee also strengthened on speculation gains in the benchmark stock index will encourage overseas funds to stay invested in the country. The Mumbai Stock Exchange Sensitive Index, or Sensex, climbed for a fourth week, and was up by 1.86% on Friday at the 3:00 pm close, capping its best run in three months.

Overseas investors have sold $6.9 billion more Indian equities than they bought this year through July 30, compared with $17.2 billion in net purchases in 2007. Overseas investors bought a net 5.97 billion rupees ($148 million) of Indian equities on July 31, reducing their net outflow this year from stocks to $6.62 billion, according to the India's stock market regulator.



India's stock markets were given a boost when a senior oil ministry official said the ministry had requested the finance ministry to ask the central bank to restart its foreign exchange operations with oil refiners. The central bank had said earlier in the week that it would stop a two-month old scheme which provided foreign exchange directly to oil refiners in exchange for their oil bonds. Refiners are the biggest buyers of dollars in the currency markets.


Money Supply And Liquidity Conditions

Short term cash rates held below 7 per cent in India on Friday due to lower demand for funds on the end of fortnight reporting day, since the banks had already made arrangements to fund their reserve requirements in advance. At 12:30 pm call rates were at 6.50/6.60 per cent, higher than the its previous close of 6.00/6.25 per cent, but much lower than Thursday's weighted average rate of 8.34 per cent.

Banks have to report their cash balances to the Reserve Bank of India every second Friday, this has the consequence that demand for fund tends to be lower in the second week of the fortnight as banks generally try to fund most of their requirement in the first week itself. The general impression is that call rates will now climb back towards 9 per cent at the start of a new fortnight next week.

Banks loans fell by Rs 720 crore in the two weeks ended July 18, taking outstanding advances to Rs 24,07,860 crore. Credit rose by 25.8%, or by Rs 4, 93,805 crore, in the 12 months through July 18. Total bank deposits rose by 21%, or Rs 5, 72,859 crore. At the same time, money supply in India grew 20% in the two weeks ended July 18 from a year earlier, compared with 20.5% in the prior two weeks.

So non-food credit growth stood at 25.8%Y during the fortnight ended July 18, up from the end of 2007 low of 21.9%. While much of the increase is probably due to increased credit needs on the part of the oil companies, it also seems that bank credit to other sectors has been picking up lately. The RBI is particularly concerned about the level of credit growth, considering that deposit growth had already slowed to 21% over the same period.

The RBI recently expressed its concern about this situation and stated that "It is noteworthy that the growth in credit during 2008-09 so far has taken the incremental non-food credit-deposit ratio to 82.4%, which appears high, given the prescribed CRR/SLR and banks’ preference for holding excess reserves on a day-to-day basis…In F2009 so far, however, some banks have expanded credit rapidly in relation to the system level growth, with attendant worsening of their credit-deposit ratios. These developments warrant heightened policy concerns in the interest of overall systemic stability and the quality of financial intermediation”.

And the bank warns: “If necessary, the Reserve Bank would consider undertaking supervisory review of those select banks which are over-extended in terms of their credit portfolios relative to their sources of funds”.

Fiscal Policy

The government has continued its loose fiscal policy in recent months. Apart from a higher oil subsidy, there is the off-budget burden of fertilizer and food subsidies to think about, as well as the farm loan waiver costs. The recent decision to raise wages for government employees will also add to the deficit burden. It is not unrealistic to anticipate the combined central plus state government fiscal deficit (including all off-budget spending) in the region of 7.7% in 2008 rising to 11.5% of GDP in F2009.

On the growth front a large gap has now opened up between the increasingly gloomy views of India’s prospects as seen from abroad, and the relative optimism of internal forecasters. The Centre for Monitoring the Indian Economy (CMIE), in Mumbai, still thinks India will grow by 9.5% this fiscal year, while JPMorgan, a foreign bank, anticipates growth in the region of 7%.

While the estimate is undoubtedly unduly high for this (calendar) year, with growth more than likely coming in in the 7.5% to 8% range, the optimism is not unjustified looking forward to 2009 and 2010. If inflation can be gotten under control India may start to hit double digit growth come 2010, and once it breaks the 10% ceiling, it may well stay above it for some considerable time. This is simply because India has a very large untapped capacity for growth, and it is not unrealistic to anticipate that this capacity can be unleased, especially if institutional reform continues, and the fiscal deficit concerns are addressed.

But things are likely to go down before they bounce back up again, since he tightening in monetary policy will achieve the desired effect of slowing aggregate demand and GDP growth further. Also negative global factors are likely to continue to weigh adversely on India’s growth outlook in the short term. Consumption growth has already slowed significantly. Investments growth has also begun to moderate and it is quite probable that the slowdown in the investment cycle will accentuate over the next six months.


Everything really now depends on the outlook for inflation and capital inflows. I believe that Inflation should peak in late summer at levels which are not too far above those we are currently seeing. They should then start moderating and we could well be back down at 7% - 8% by the end of the financial year. In part this depends on oil prices, and year on year base effects, and oil and food prices, of course, also partly depend on growth in India and the other key emerging economies. Thus we have a kind of "inbuilt stabiliser", since as the major emerging economies slow, commodity prices ease back, and as this happens the central banks can begin once more to loosen monetary policy, providing a kind of win-win feedback effect.

This wioll then operate until commodity prices rebound once more and the emerging central banks tighten again, etc, etc. The key point to grasp here is that it is consumers in the heavy energy consumption OECD economies who are going to do the heavy lifting of bearing the pain here, as resources are effectively transferred from their wallets to those of the oil producers, and it is this process, rather than what happens in the emerging economies which is likely to keep a cap on global growth in the coming years.

Thus the RBI is now unlikely to hike policy rates further unless oil and other commodity prices lift up again from the current levels, and if global growth slows further this is hard to see happening. The second risk to the ‘no further rate hike’ outlook is, of course, any large global financial market shock that triggers major capital outflows from emerging markets generally and from India. In such a case, the RBI would need to hike the policy rate to prevent any major depreciation in the exchange rate and consequent adverse impact on the inflation outlook. I feel however that this scenario is being rather overplayed at the present time. There will almost certainly be some kind of "emerging market correction" (in central and eastern Europe, perhaps, or possibly in China) but if this is the case it is hard to see India being in the direct line of fire, since if the money leaves India, one might well ask where it will be bound? Certainly not to Japan, where yields are still more or less on the floor, and the economy almost certainly in recession. It is also hard to see financial turmoil troubled economies in the US and Europe serving as safe havens this time round, so on balance I would put the risk of major outflows from India at a rather low level, which is not, of course, the same thing as being complacent.


More fickle, however, are the foreigners who bet large sums on Indian shares when the stockmarket was in full bloom. They are deserting the country, withdrawing $6.7 billion so far in 2008. The only consolation is that as share prices fall, so does the amount they can repatriate, relieving some of the pressure on the currency.

Kling writes:

Early in 2007, the price of oil was $60 a barrel. Recently, it has been above $130 a barrel. Which of the following does Paul Krugman believe:

(a) market fundamentals justified $60 a barrel then, and they justify $130 a barrel now; or

(b) market fundamentals justified a much higher price in 2007?

...We know that Krugman does not believe that today's oil price is out of line with fundamentals. Krugman's view, in effect, is that if speculators artificially boost the price of oil, then supply will exceed demand, and the excess has to go somewhere. Where are the inventories?

This view ought to hold in reverse. If speculators artificially kept the price of oil too low early in 2007, then demand should have exceeded supply and inventories should have vanished. Yet they did not. So is Krugman forced by his model to conclude that the price of oil of $60 also reflected fundamentals?

The "fundamentals" price of oil depends on a number of factors that cannot be perfectly foreseen. Among these are (1) will the world enter a deep and prolonged recession in 2007, and (2) will global oil production in 2007 be higher than it was in 2006? Today, we know that the answer to both questions is no, and conditional on knowing that answer, we can see that $60/barrel was too low a price. But a year ago, no one knew those answers.

Likewise, the price of oil today is very much dependent on the answer to questions such as (1) will the world enter a deep and prolonged recession in 2008, and (2) will global oil production in 2008 be higher than it was in 2007? Today, we do not know the answer to these questions. If the answer is yes, the price of oil today is much too high. If the answer is no, the price could still be too low.

As for the specific question of "where are the inventories", let's be a little more precise about the question being asked. The correct question is, Did the movement along the demand curve that resulted from the increased price show up as an increase in inventories? The correct answer is, no, it was offset by a shift in the demand curve for newly industrialized countries and the oil producing countries. For example, China may have consumed a half million more barrels of oil per day in 2007 compared with 2006.

Where are the inventories? China already burned them.

Technorati Tags: oil, oil prices, oil bubble, oil price bubble, oil speculation

The story from Bloomberg:

read more