phoffman@channelchek.com, Author at Channelchek

Arctic Drilling Approval – More than Meets the Eye

Posted on March 17, 2023March 17, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Three Reasons the Willow Arctic Oil Drilling Project Was Approved

For more than six decades, Alaska’s North Slope has been a focus of intense controversy over oil development and wilderness protection, with no end in sight. Willow field, a 600-million-barrel, US$8 billion oil project recently approved by the Biden administration – to the outrage of environmental and climate activists – is the latest chapter in that long saga.

To understand why President Joe Biden allowed the project, despite vowing “no more drilling on federal lands, period” during his campaign for president, some historical background is necessary, along with a closer look at the ways domestic and international fears are complicating any decision for or against future oil development on the North Slope.

More Than Just Willow

The Willow project lies within a vast, 23 million-acre area known as the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, or NPR-A. This was one of four such reserves set aside in the early 1900s to guarantee a supply of oil for the U.S. military. Though no production existed at the time in NPR-A, geologic information and surface seeps of oil suggested large resources across the North Slope.

This article was republished with permission from The Conversation, a news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It represents the research-based findings and thoughts of, Scott L. Montgomery, Lecturer, Jackson School of International Studies, University of Washington.

Proof came with the 1968 discovery of the supergiant Prudhoe Bay field, which began producing oil in 1977. Exploratory programs in the NPR-A, however, found only small oil accumulations worthy of local uses.

Then, in the 2000s, new geologic understanding and advanced exploration technology led companies to lease portions of the reserve, and they soon made large fossil fuel discoveries. Because NPR-A is federal land, government approval is required for any development. To date, most have been approved. Willow is the latest.

Caribou in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska are important for Native groups. However, Native communities have also been split over support for drilling, which can bring income. Bob Wick/Bureau of Land Management

Opposition to North Slope drilling from conservationists, environmental organizations and some Native communities, mainly in support of wilderness preservation, has been fierce since the opening of Prudhoe Bay and the construction of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline in the 1970s. In the wake of 1970s oil crises, opponents failed to stop development.

During the next four decades, controversy shifted east to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Republican presidents and congressional leaders repeatedly attempted to open the refuge to drilling but were consistently stifled – until 2017. That year, the Trump administration opened it to leasing. Ironically, no companies were interested. Oil prices had fallen, risk was high and the reputational cost was large.

To the west of the refuge, however, a series of new discoveries in NPR-A and adjacent state lands were drawing attention as a major new oil play with multibillion-barrel potential. Oil prices had risen, and though they fell again in 2020, they have been mostly above $70 per barrel – high enough to encourage significant new development.

ConocoPhillips’ Willow project is in the northeast corner of the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska. USGS, Department of Interior

Opposition, with Little Success

Opposition to the new Willow project has been driven by concerns about the effects of drilling on wildlife and of increasing fossil fuel use on the climate. Willow’s oil is estimated to be capable of releasing 287 million metric tons of carbon dioxide if refined into fuels and consumed.

In particular, opponents have focused on a planned pipeline that will extend the existing infrastructure further westward, deeper into NPR-A, and likely encourage further exploratory drilling.

So far, that resistance has had little success.

Twenty miles to the south of Willow is the Peregrine discovery area, estimated to hold around 1.6 billion barrels of oil. Its development was approved by the Biden administration in late 2022. To the east lies the Pikka-Horseshoe discovery area, with around 2 billion barrels. It’s also likely to gain approval. Still other NPR-A drilling has occurred to the southwest (Harpoon prospect), northeast (Cassin), and southeast (Stirrup).

Young protesters in Washington in 2022 urged Biden to reject the Willow project. Jemal Countess/Getty Images for Sunrise AU

Questions of Legality

One reason the Biden administration approved the Willow project involves legality: ConocoPhillips holds the leases and has a legal right to drill. Canceling its leases would bring a court case that, if lost, would set a precedent, cost the government millions of dollars in fees and do nothing to stop oil drilling.

Instead, the government made a deal with ConocoPhillips that shrank the total surface area to be developed at Willow by 60%, including removing a sensitive wildlife area known as Teshekpuk Lake. The Biden administration also announced that it was putting 13 million acres of the NPR-A and all federal waters of the Arctic Ocean off limits to new leases.

That has done little to stem anger over approval of the project, however. Two groups have already sued over the approval.

Taking Future Risks into Account

To further understand Biden’s approval of the Willow project, one has to look into the future, too.

Discoveries in the northeastern NPR-A suggest this will become a major new oil production area for the U.S. While actual oil production is not expected there for several years, its timing will coincide with a forecast plateau or decline in total U.S. production later this decade, because of what one shale company CEO described as the end of shale oil’s aggressive growth.

Historically, declines in domestic supply have brought higher fuel prices and imports. High gasoline and diesel prices, with their inflationary impacts, can weaken the political party in power. While current prices and inflation haven’t damaged Biden and the Democrats too much, nothing guarantees this will remain the case.

Geopolitical Concerns, Particularly Europe

The Biden administration also faces geopolitical pressure right now due to Russia’s war on Ukraine.

U.S. companies ramped up exports of oil and natural gas over the past year to become a lifeline for Europe as the European Union uses sanctions and bans on Russian fossil fuel imports to try to weaken the Kremlin’s ability to finance its war on Ukraine. U.S. imports have been able to replace a major portion of Russian supply that Europe once counted on.

Europe’s energy crisis has also led to the return of energy security as a top concern of national leaders worldwide. Without a doubt, the crisis has clarified that oil and gas are still critical to the global economy. The Biden administration is taking the position that reducing the supply by a significant amount – necessary as it is to avoid damaging climate change – cannot be done by prohibition alone. Halting new drilling worldwide would drive fuel prices sky high, weakening economies and the ability to deal with the climate problem.

Energy transitions depend on changes in demand, not just supply. As an energy scholar, I believe advancing the affordability of electric vehicles and the infrastructure they need would do much more for reducing oil use than drilling bans. Though it may seem counterintuitive, by aiding European economic stability, U.S. exports of fossil fuels may also help the EU plan to accelerate noncarbon energy use in the years ahead.

Some “Covid Stocks” are Turning Out to be “Post-Covid” Plays Too

Posted on March 17, 2023March 17, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

On May 11 the Covid National Emergency Will Be Declared Over – Are You in the Right Stocks?

Were there any companies that had lasting benefits from the shutdowns and lockdowns in response to the pandemic? During the first two years of the 2020s, pandemic consumer behavior caused sports equipment makers, communications, ecommerce, and healthcare companies to be favorites of investors. As investors then pivoted and began to look for the “post-covid” trade, many of these high-flyers, including Peleton (PTON), Teledoc (TDOC), Chlorox (CLX) and others, no longer held the advantage they had, and sold off. The focus then turned to energy, leisure, and other segments that had been decimated during forced lockdowns and fear. While some once strong sectors and segments faltered, some ecommerce companies, that were experiencing growth going into the pandemic, received a huge, albeit challenging, boost during the changed economy. The astute ones took the opportunity to grow deeper roots.

Online businesses are one segment where many companies maintained their bulge from the Covid lockdowns. The following insights are largely from a roadshow I attended, supplemented by research by Noble Capital Markets on Channelchek.com. While this isn’t the only ecommerce business that has retained substantial benefits from the pandemic, it is a company that can serve as a template as to what to look for when doing your own fundamental analysis.

1 (800) FLOWERS

Toll free numbers (eight hundred numbers) for decades helped consumers overcome the reluctance to incur long-distance phone charges when needing help ordering from a mail order company. At the same time they saved the company from time-consuming collect calls. Introduced in 1967, it was a win-win technology that was quickly adopted and allowed broader reach.

From very humble beginnings an entrepreneur who still heads the company grew a 14-store flower shop based on Long Island by amassing enough financing to acquire 1-800-FLOWERS (FLWS), an ailing store based in Texas. His company instantly became a national brand through the use of this toll-free technology.

The company today is worth over $621 million and has not forgotten that they are a technology-based retailer. Their product is also not narrowly defined as flowers, but instead gifts for special occasions and people who are special to you. FLWS is a successful online retailer, willing to engage pertinent technology, learn from it, adapt that which works, and commercialize it to maintain a competitive edge in the ecommerce segment. This includes automation which helps offset post-pandemic era wage increases; artificial intelligence, which can help customers customize a notecard with a poem; and of course all that helps online retail build customers.

The pandemic allowed FLOWERS to double the size of its file of customers. On the revenue side, the company went from $1.2 billion in 2019, then quickly grew and peaked at $2.2 billion by March of 2022. They have been able to keep much of this revenue gain, and it isn’t going backward. This is because the ecommerce trend was already in place, but the pandemic helped accelerate the use and permanent adoption by individuals that are now in the habit of thinking online when it comes to special occasion gifts. This trend continues, even as the overall economy is showing cracks.

The negative for FLOWERS, like other retailers operating during the pandemic period, was grappling with supply chain issues and dramatically higher shipping costs. The cost of having a container shipped has now dropped significantly. FLWS, during the worst period, had worked to keep more than ample inventory of non-perishables since the supply-chain was not reliable. As a result, they are still working off more expensive inventory, which has the effect of a higher cost of goods sold, this shows up on financials as narrower profit margins. The working off of this more expensive inventory and replenishing it with goods with lower shipping costs should serve to expand profit margins going forward, even if revenue remains neutral.

Ecommerce

How might this this apply to other ecommerce companies? Flowers has innovative management that is not afraid to experiment with technology and adapt to their business those which helps save them money or reach more customers. A good way to discern this is by attending industry conferences such as NobleCon19 in December or attending roadshows as I did to meet FLWS management.

Another characteristic that this company had, that is admirable, is an acceleration of users during the pandemic that may not have otherwise decided to buy online. The company makes good use of this larger root system and stays in touch with the customers using its expanded list, sharing thoughts on other offerings.

An interesting situation of 1(800)-FLOWERS.com that may exist with others is the changed cost of shipping and inventory. This negative, which is still unwinding, provides a declining cost of goods sold for a period of time. This could translate into higher earnings, depending on other market and business factors – this could get the attention of investors. It’s important to note that once inventories are worked off, margins would stabilize, and lower-cost inventories would no longer contribute to net earnings.

Take Away

Meeting with management, in this case at a road show sponsored by Noble Capital Markets (see calendar here), or at a large investor conference such as NobleCon (Information provided here) helps provide insight into a company itself, an evaluation of management, plus ideas of what to look for in related companies. I wouldn’t expect CNBC or Bloomberg to spend as much time discussing a $621 million company as they spend on AAPL or MSFT, nor would I expect that the average investor can have breakfast with Elon Musk of Tesla or Mark Zuckerberg of META, and get to know their plans, their company, and current industry factors that they are challenged with.

If you are serious about discovering what’s beyond CNBC, Stocktwits, and Yahoo Finance, I recommend attending a meet-the-management style road show and if you can, an investment conference that showcases industries you are interested in.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.channelchek.com/company/flws

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/30/biden-end-covid-health-emergency-may-00080305

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/02/10/notice-on-the-continuation-of-the-national-emergency-concerning-the-coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19-pandemic-3/

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/FLWS/1-800-flowerscom/revenue

What AI Will do to Job Availability

Posted on March 16, 2023March 16, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

The Fear of Mass Unemployment Due to Artificial Intelligence and Robotics Is Unfounded

People are arguing over whether artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics will eliminate human employment. People seem to have an all-or-nothing belief that either the use of technology in the workplace will destroy human employment and purpose or it won’t affect it at all. The replacement of human jobs with robotics and AI is known as “technological unemployment.”

Although robotics can turn materials into economic goods in a fraction of the time it would take a human, in some cases using minimal human energy, some claim that AI and robotics will actually bring about increasing human employment. According to a 2020 Forbes projection, AI and robotics will be a strong creator of jobs and work for people across the globe in the near future. However, also in 2020, Daron Acemoglu and Pascual Restrepo published a study that projected negative job growth when AI and robotics replace human jobs, predicting significant job loss each time a robot replaces a human in the workplace. But two years later, an article in The Economist showed that many economists have backtracked on their projection of a high unemployment rate due to AI and robotics in the workplace. According to the 2022 Economist article, “Fears of a prolonged period of high unemployment did not come to pass. . . . The gloomy narrative, which says that an invasion of job-killing robots is just around the corner, has for decades had an extraordinary hold on the popular imagination.” So which scenario is correct?

Contrary to popular belief, no industrialized nation has ever completely replaced human energy with technology in the workplace. For instance, the steam shovel never put construction workers out of work; whether people want to work in construction is a different question. And bicycles did not become obsolete because of vehicle manufacturing: “Consumer spending on bicycles and accessories peaked at $8.3 billion in 2021,” according to an article from the World Economic Forum.

Do people generally think AI and robotics can run an economy without human involvement, energy, ingenuity, and cooperation? While AI and robotics have boosted economies, they cannot plan or run an economy or create technological unemployment worldwide. “Some countries are in better shape to join the AI competition than others,” according to the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Although an accurate statement, it misses the fact that productive economies adapt to technological changes better than nonproductive economies. Put another way, productive people are even more effective when they use technology. Firms using AI and robotics can lower production costs, lower prices, and stimulate demand; hence, employment grows if demand and therefore production increase. In the unlikely event that AI or robotic productive technology does not lower a firm’s prices and production costs, employment opportunities will decline in that industry, but employment will shift elsewhere, potentially expanding another industry’s capacity. This industry may then increase its use of AI and robotics, creating more employment opportunities there.

In the not-so-distant past, office administrators did not know how to use computers, but when the computer entered the workplace, it did not eliminate administrative employment as was initially predicted. Now here we are, walking around with minicomputers in our pants pockets. The introduction of the desktop computer did not eliminate human administrative workers—on the contrary, the computer has provided more employment since its introduction in the workplace. Employees and business owners, sometimes separated by time and space, use all sorts of technological devices, communicate with one another across vast networks, and can be increasingly productive.

I remember attending a retirement party held by a company where I worked decades ago. The retiring employee told us all a story about when the company brought in its first computer back in the late ’60s. The retiree recalled, “The boss said we were going to use computers instead of typewriters and paper to handle administrative tasks. The next day, her department went from a staff of thirty to a staff of five.” The day after the department installed computers, twenty-five people left the company to seek jobs elsewhere so they would not “have to learn and deal with them darn computers.”

People often become afraid of losing their jobs when firms introduce new technology, particularly technology that is able to replicate human tasks. However, mass unemployment due to technological innovation has never happened in any industrialized nation. The notion that AI will disemploy humans in the marketplace is unfounded. Mike Thomas noted in his article “Robots and AI Taking Over Jobs: What to Know about the Future of Jobs” that “artificial intelligence is poised to eliminate millions of current jobs—and create millions of new ones.” The social angst about the future of AI and robotics is reminiscent of the early nineteenth-century Luddites of England and their fear of replacement technology. Luddites, heavily employed in the textile industry, feared the weaving machine would take their jobs. They traveled throughout England breaking and vandalizing machines and new manufacturing technology because of their fear of technological unemployment. However, as the textile industry there became capitalized, employment in that industry actually grew. History tells us that technology drives the increase of work and jobs for humans, not the opposite.

We should look forward to unskilled and semiskilled workers’ upgrading from monotonous work because of AI and robotics. Of course, AI and robotics will have varying effects on different sectors; but as a whole, they are enablers and amplifiers of human work. As noted, the steam shovel did not disemploy construction workers. The taxi industry was not eliminated because of Uber’s technology; if anything, Uber’s new AI technology lowered the barriers of entry to the taxi industry. Musicians were not eliminated when music was digitized; instead, this innovation gave musicians larger platforms and audiences, allowing them to reach millions of people with the swipe of a screen. And dating apps running on AI have helped millions of people fall in love and live happily ever after.

About the Author

Raushan Gross is an Associate Professor of Business Management at Pfeiffer University. His works include Basic Entrepreneurship, Management and Strategy, and the e-book The Inspiring Life and Beneficial Impact of Entrepreneurs.

The FOMC’s March Meeting Considerations

Posted on March 16, 2023March 16, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Will Systemic Risks to the Banking System Override Inflation Concerns When the Fed Meets?

Yes, the Federal Reserve’s central objective is to help maintain a sound banking system in the United States. The Fed’s regional presidents are currently in a blackout period (no public appearances) until after the FOMC meeting ends on March 22. So there is little for markets to go on to determine if the difficulties being experienced by banks will hinder the Fed’s resolve to bring inflation down to 2%. Or if the systemic risks to banks will override concerns surrounding inflation. Below we discuss some of the considerations the Fed may consider at the next meeting.

The Federal Reserve’s sound banking system responsibility is part of its broader responsibility to promote financial stability in the U.S. economy. The Fed does its best to balance competing challenges through monetary policy to promote price stability (low-inflation), maintaining the safety and soundness of individual banks, and supervising and regulating the overall banking industry to ensure that it operates in a prudent and sound manner.

While the headline news after the Fed adjusts monetary policy is usually about the Fed Funds target, the Fed can also adjust Reserve Requirements for banks. Along with that, the rate paid on these reserves, Interest on Excess Reserves (IOER). Another key bank rate that is mostly invisible to consumers is the Discount Rate. This is the interest rate at which banks can borrow money directly from the Federal Reserve. The discount rate is set by the Fed’s Board of Governors and is typically higher than the Federal Funds rate.

Banks try to avoid going to the Discount Window at the Fed because using this more expensive money is a sign to investors or depositors that something may be unhealthy at the institution. Figures for banks using this facility are reported each Thursday afternoon. There doesn’t seem to be bright flashing warning signs in the March 9 report. The amount lent on average for the seven-day period ending Thursday March 9, had decreased substantially, following a decrease the prior week. While use of the Discount Window facility is just one indicator of the overall banking systems health, it is not sending up red flags for the Fed or other stakeholders.

The European Central Bank Raised Rates

There is an expression, “when America sneezes, the world catches a cold.” The actions of the central bank in Europe, (the equivalent of the Federal Reserve in the U.S.) demonstrates that the bank failures in the U.S. are viewed as less than a sneeze. The ECB raised interest rates by half of a percentage point on Thursday (March 16). This is in line with its previously stated plan, even as the U.S. worries surrounding the banking system have shaken confidence in banks and the financial markets in recent days.

The ECB didn’t completely ignore the noise across the Atlantic; it said in a statement that its policymakers were “monitoring current market tensions closely” and the bank “stands ready to respond as necessary to preserve price stability and financial stability in the euro area.”

While Fed Chair Powell is restricted from making public addresses during the pre-FOMC blackout period, it is highly likely that there have been conversations with his cohorts in Frankfurt.

The Fed’s Upcoming Decision

On March 14, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) reported core inflation (without volatile food and energy) rose in February. Another indicator, the most recent PCE index released on February 24 also demonstrated that core prices are rising at a pace faster than the Fed deems healthy for consumers, banking, or the economy at large. The inflation numbers suggest it would be perilous for the Fed to pause its tightening efforts now.

What has so far been limited to a few U.S. banks is not likely to have been a complete surprise to those that have been setting monetary policy for the last 12 months. It may have surprised most market participants, but warning signs are usually picked up by the FRS, FDIC, and even OCC well in advance. And before news of a bank closure becomes public. Yet, the FOMC continued raising rates and implementing quantitative tightening. The big difference today is, the world is now aware of the problems and the markets are spooked.

The post-meeting FOMC statement will likely differ vastly from the past few meetings. While what the Fed decides to do remains far from certain, what is certain is that inflation is still a problem, and rising interest rates mathematically erode the value of bank assets. At the same time, money supply (M2) is declining at its fastest rate in history. At its most basic definition, M2 is consumer’s cash position, including held at banks. As less cash is held at banks, some institutions may find themselves in the position SVB was in; they have to sell assets to meet withdrawals. The asset values, which were “purchased” at lower rates, now sell for far less than were paid for them.

This would seem to put the Fed in a box. However, if it uses the Discount Window tool, and makes borrowing easier by banks, it may be able to satisfy both demands. Tighter monetary policy, while providing liquidity to banks that are being squeezed.

Take Away

What the Fed will ultimately do remains far from certain. And a lot can happen in a week. Bank closings occur on Friday’s so the FDIC has the weekend to seize control. So if you’re concerned, don’t take Friday afternoons off.

If the Fed Declines to raise rates in March it could send a signal that the Fed is weakening its fight against inflation. This could cause rates to spike higher in anticipation of rising inflation. Everyone loses if that is the case, consumers, banks, and those holding U.S. dollars.

The weakness appears to be isolated in the regional-bank sector and was likely known to the Fed prior to the closing of the banks.

Consider this, only two things have changed for Powell since the last meeting, one is rising core CPI. The other is that he will have to do an even better job at building confidence post-FOMC meeting. Business people and investors want to know that the Fed can handle the hiccups along the path to stamping out high inflation.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h41/20230309/

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/cpi.nr0.htm

Oil Prices Could Have a Huge Impact on These Sectors

Posted on March 15, 2023March 15, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Which Way is Oil Going, and What it Could Mean for Investors in Related Sectors

Whether the sudden and severe decline in oil prices is an opportunity to invest in sectors that will benefit from cheaper fuel, a sign of further problems in the economy, or transitory, remains to be seen. It may depend on two overriding factors – and there are strong arguments supporting each. Below we look at the different scenarios and the sectors that are impacted.

Background

Energy futures and oil-related stocks like Chevron (CVX) and Exxon (XOM) gapped down at the open two days this week as concern about the overall health of the financial sector as two banks were closed and a major rating agency downgraded the banking sector Since Friday. U.S. oil futures remained below $70 per barrel midweek, as prices of WTI have now dipped 13% to levels not seen since December 2021.

These downward price moves are a reaction to thinking that demand will wane in a slowing U.S. economy. Also that it may take longer for the Chinese economy to rise to expected levels. Although far less impactful, approval of the Willow oil drilling project by the White House demonstrates a reversal of the ‘no more drilling’ policy by this administration.

A report by the International Energy Agency (IEA) this morning suggests the price decline may be temporary. The IEA anticipates that the oil markets will switch from a supply overhang in the first half of 2023 to a deficit later in the year. This is expected as OPEC continues its plan to cut production, and that the increased air traffic, along with an economic rebound in China will push global oil demand to a record high, according to the IEA.

*Image: President Joe Biden meets with staff in the Oval Office, Monday, January 23, 2023, to discuss the Willow oil project. (Official White House Photo by Cameron Smith)*

Oil remains one of the most crucial commodities to the modern world. Its price has a significant impact on various industries and investment sectors. Below are the sectors that stand to benefit if the recent decline in prices remains intact or declines further:

Transportation Industry is a significant beneficiary of lower oil prices. The reason of course is because fuel costs are a significant expense for airlines, trucking, and shipping companies. When the cost of fuel follows the decline, the transportation industry enjoys a reduction in operating costs. This can result in wider margins on tickets sold for air travel, lower shipping costs for businesses including retailers, and lower prices for cruise lines.

The Chemical Industry is another sector that benefits from declining oil prices. Many chemicals are derived from crude oil, and a decrease in oil prices means a decrease in the cost of raw materials. This, in turn, can lead to lower prices for chemical products such as fertilizers, plastics, and other materials.

The Consumer Goods Industry is also a significant beneficiary of declining oil prices. This is because many consumer goods are made from oil-based materials such as plastics, rubber, and synthetic fabrics. When oil prices decline, the cost of these materials decreases, resulting in lower production costs and, ultimately, lower prices for consumers.

The Renewable Energy Industry is not directly related to oil prices, a decline in oil prices can benefit this sector indirectly. Renewable energy sources such as wind and solar power are becoming increasingly competitive with traditional fossil fuels, and a decrease in the price of oil can make it more challenging for the fossil fuel industry to compete. This can result in increased investment in renewable energy and a shift toward cleaner, more sustainable sources of energy.

Emerging Markets, particularly those that are oil-importing countries, can benefit significantly from declining oil prices. These countries rely heavily on imported oil, and a decrease in oil prices can result in significant cost savings for these countries. This can lead to increased economic growth, as businesses have more money to invest in other areas and consumers have more disposable income to spend.

Take Away

Oil has dropped considerably this year. This is in part because economic activity is expected to become lower, and problems in the banking sector. This may not last through the year as indicated by the IEA. Others believe this is the start of further declines. Should oil prices not track higher, stock market investors could look at the transportation, chemical, and consumer goods industries, as well as the renewable energy sector and emerging markets. As with any economic change, it is essential to carefully analyze the potential effects on different industries and sectors to make informed investment decisions.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.iea.org/topics/oil-market-report

https://www.investing.com/news/commodities-news/oil-sinks-as-moodys-banking-downgrade-drops-another-shoe-on-crisis-3030407

Guess the Odds that the NCAA Games Will Attract More Gambling in 2023

Posted on March 15, 2023March 15, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

As March Madness Looms, Growth in Legalized Sports Betting May Pose a Threat to College Athletes

March Madness began on March 14, 2023, it’s a sure bet that millions of Americans will be making wagers on the annual college basketball tournament.

The American Gaming Association estimates that in 2022, 45 million people – or more than 17% of American adults – planned to wager US$3.1 billion on the NCAA tournament. That makes it one of the nation’s most popular sports betting events, alongside contests such as the Kentucky Derby and the Super Bowl. By at least one estimate, March Madness is the most popular betting target of all.

While people have been betting on March Madness for years, one difference now is that betting on college sports is legal in many states. This is largely due to a 2018 Supreme Court ruling that cleared the way for each state to decide whether to permit people to gamble on sporting events. Prior to the ruling, legal sports betting was only allowed in Nevada.

Since the ruling, sports betting has grown dramatically. Currently, 36 states allow some form of legalized sports betting. And now, Georgia, Maine and Kentucky are proposing legislation to make sports betting legal.

About two weeks after sports betting became legal in Ohio on Jan. 1, 2023, someone, disappointed by an unexpected loss of the University of Dayton men’s basketball team to Virginia Commonwealth University, made threats and left disparaging messages against Dayton athletes and the coaching staff.

The Ohio case is by no means isolated. In 2019, a Babson College student who was a “prolific sports gambler” was sentenced to 18 months in prison for sending death threats to at least 45 professional and collegiate athletes in 2017.

Faculty members of Miami University’s Institute for Responsible Gaming, Lottery, and Sports are concerned that the increasing prevalence of sports betting could potentially lead to more such incidents, putting more athletes in danger of threats from disgruntled gamblers who blame them for their gambling losses.

The anticipated growth in sports gambling is quite sizable. Analysts estimate the market in the U.S. may reach over US$167 billion by 2029.

Gambling Makes Inroads into Colleges

Concerns over college athletes being targeted by upset gamblers are not new. Players and sports organizations have expressed worry that expanded gambling could lead to harassment and compromise their safety. Such concerns led the nation’s major sports organizations – MLB, NBA, NFL, NHL and NCAA – to sue New Jersey in 2012 over a plan to initiate legal sports betting in that state. They argued that sports betting would make the public think that games were being thrown. Ultimately, the Supreme Court ruled that it was up to states to decide if they wanted to permit legal gambling.

Sports betting has also made inroads into America’s college campuses. Some universities, such as Louisiana State University and Michigan State University, have signed multimillion-dollar deals with casinos or gaming companies to promote gambling on campus.

Athletic conferences are also cashing in on the data related to these games and events. For instance, the Mid-Atlantic Conference signed a lucrative five-year deal in 2022 to provide real-time statistical event data to gambling companies, which then leverage the data to create real-time wager opportunities during sporting events.

As sports betting comes to colleges and universities, it means the schools will inevitably have to deal with some of the negative aspects of gambling. This potentially includes more than just gambling addiction. It could also involve the potential for student-athletes and coaches to become targets of threats, intimidation or bribes to influence the outcome of events.

The risk for addiction on campus is real. According to the National Council on Problem Gambling, over 2 million adults in the U.S. have a “serious” gambling problem, and another 4 million to 6 million may have mild to moderate problems. One report estimates that 6% of college students have a serious gambling problem.

What Can be Done?

Two faculty fellows at Miami University’s Institute for Responsible Gaming, Lottery, and Sport – former Ohio State Senator William Coley and Sharon Custer – recommend that regulators and policymakers work with colleges and universities to reduce the potential harm from the growth in legal gaming. Specifically, they recommend that each state regulatory authority:

Develop plans to coordinate between different governmental agencies to ensure that individuals found guilty of violations are sanctioned in other jurisdictions.
Dedicate some of the revenue from gaming to develop educational materials and support services for athletes and those around them.
Create anonymous tip lines to report threats, intimidation or influence, and fund an independent entity to respond to these reports.
Assess and protect athlete privacy. For instance, schools might decline to publish contact information for student-athletes and coaches in public directories.
Train athletes and those around them on basic privacy management. For instance, schools might advise athletes to not post on public social media outlets, especially if the post gives away their physical location.

The NCAA or athletic conferences could lead the development of resources, policies and sanctions that serve to educate, protect and support student-athletes and others around them who work at the schools for which they play. This will require significant investment to be comprehensive and effective.

This article was republished with permission from The Conversation, a news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It represents the research-based findings and thoughts of, Jason W. Osborne, Professor of Statistics, Institute for Responsible Gaming, Lottery, and Sport, Miami University.

Will the Fed Now Exercise Caution?

Posted on March 14, 2023March 14, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

FOMC Now Contending With Banks and Sticky Inflation

The Federal Reserve is facing a rather sticky problem. Despite its best efforts over the past year, inflation is stubbornly refusing to head south with any urgency to a target of 2%.

Rather, the inflation report released on March 14, 2023, shows consumer prices rose 0.4% in February, meaning the year-over-year increase is now at 6% – which is only a little lower than in January.

So, what do you do if you are a member of the rate-setting Federal Open Market Committee meeting March 21-22 to set the U.S. economy’s interest rates?

The inclination based on the Consumer Price Index data alone may be to go for broke and aggressively raise rates in a bid to tame the inflationary beast. But while the inflation report may be the last major data release before the rate-setting meeting, it is far from being the only information that central bankers will be chewing over.

Don’t let yourself be misled. Understand issues with help from experts

And economic news from elsewhere – along with jitters from a market already rather spooked by two recent bank failures – may steady the Fed’s hand. In short, monetary policymakers may opt to go with what the market has already seemingly factored in: an increase of 0.25-0.5 percentage point.

Here’s why.

While it is true that inflation is proving remarkably stubborn – and a robust March job report may have put further pressure on the Fed – digging into the latest CPI data shows some signs that inflation is beginning to wane.

Energy prices fell 0.6% in February, after increasing 0.2% the month before. This is a good indication that fuel prices are not out of control despite the twin pressures of extreme weather in the U.S. and the ongoing war in Ukraine. Food prices in February continued to climb, by 0.4% – but here, again, there were glimmers of good news in that meat, fish and egg prices had softened.

Although the latest consumer price report isn’t entirely what the Fed would have wanted to read – it does underline just how difficult the battle against inflation is – there doesn’t appear to be enough in it to warrant an aggressive hike in rates. Certainly it might be seen as risky to move to a benchmark higher than what the market has already factored in. So, I think a quarter point increase is the most likely scenario when Fed rate-setters meet later this month – but certainly no more than a half point hike at most.

This is especially true given that there are signs that the U.S. economy is softening. The latest Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Job Openings and Labor Turnover survey indicates that fewer businesses are looking as aggressively for labor as they once were. In addition, there have been some major rounds of layoffs in the tech sector. Housing has also slowed amid rising mortgage rates and falling prices. And then there was the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank – caused in part by the Fed’s repeated hikes in its base rate.

This all points to “caution” being the watchword when it comes to the next interest rate decision. The market has priced in a moderate increase in the Fed’s benchmark rate; anything too aggressive has the potential to come as a shock and send stock markets tumbling.

This article was republished with permission from The Conversation, a news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It represents the research-based findings and thoughts of Christopher Decker, Professor of Economics, University of Nebraska Omaha.

Grab Your Popcorn, AMC ‘APE’ Conversion Gets Shareholder Vote

Posted on March 14, 2023March 14, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Will Adam Aron CEO of AMC Win the Long Awaited Battle?

Management of AMC Entertainment Holdings ($AMC) is holding the long-awaited special meeting at noon Eastern time, Tuesday, March 14. At this meeting, shareholders will vote the peculiar $APE shares that were paid out as a dividend to shareholders. The dividend shares that were announced with the message “Today we Pounce” from the CEO Adam Aron created quite a stir – they seemed to have been designed to root out fraudulent shares and challenge any naked shorts of the AMC common shares.

The shareholders’ opportunity is a decision of whether or not to increase the firm’s stock authorization and convert AMC Preferred Equity Units (ticker: APE) into AMC common shares ($AMC). It will also vote on a 10-for-1 reverse stock split that would only take place if the APE measure passes.

AMC management won an endorsement from the proxy firm Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) for the reverse stock split and preferred stock conversion. Institutional Shareholder Services is a market intelligence and influence proxy voting firm, its endorsement increases the odds of management having their wish.

If approved, it would represent an important career win for AMC’s Aron, who has become a superhero of sorts to the meme stock investors that helped the firm through the pandemic. He has shown himself to be able to stay one step ahead of those that would profit if AMC stock falters. Some stockholders supporting the measure take this as a fight between weak and strong and good and evil where prevailing is the only option.

In 2020 AMC Theatres lost $4.6 billion in sales due to Covid-related lockdowns and low attendance. Some powerful investors had shorted shares, many small investors grouped together and purchased the stock in droves, this created unexpected problems for the institutional short sellers that had large trades betting against AMC’s survival.

These investors caused the stock price to increase which allowed AMC to raise cash and survive and thrive.

The APE units, which represent one hundredth of a preferred share, have the same voting power of common shares.

Not all AMC shareholders are as supportive. Some are suing the company, arguing the APE sales decimated the voting power of common shareholders who might oppose increasing the firm’s share authorization.

Aron said during the fourth-quarter earnings call that if the vote falls short, the company could be forced to sell more APE shares at lower prices than a combined AMC share. On the same call he credited selling stock with helping the firm survive the lockdowns.

“We wouldn’t be blocked from raising capital, but we’d be raising capital on much less attractive terms,” Aron said. “It would cost more dilution to the stock that is entirely 100% preventable if a majority of our shareholders vote yes.”

The company has provided this link for livestreaming the March 14 meeting.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1411579/000110465922092397/tm2223780d1_ex99-1.htm

https://variety.com/2021/film/news/amc-theatres-4-6-billion-loss-covid-1234927642/

https://investor.amctheatres.com/corporate-overview/default.aspx

https://www.barrons.com/articles/amc-ape-stock-price-shareholder-meeting-f412434d

How Easy Money Killed Silicon Valley Bank

Posted on March 13, 2023March 13, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

SVB Invested in the Entire Bubble of Everything Says, Renowned Economist

“SVB invested in the entire bubble of everything,” writes Daniel Lacalle, PhD, economist, fund manager,and once ranked as one of the top twenty most influential economists in the world (2016 and 2017). He explains in his article below the pathway the Silicon Valley bank took and “bets,” which it lost, that led to the bank’s quick demise. “Aaaaand it’s gone,” Lacalle says, borrowing a line from a South Park episode that originally aired in March 2009. – Paul Hoffman, Managing Editor, Channelchek

The second-largest collapse of a bank in recent history after Lehman Brothers could have been prevented. Now the impact is too large, and the contagion risk is difficult to measure.

The demise of the Silicon Valley Bank (SVB) is a classic bank run driven by a liquidity event, but the important lesson for everyone is that the enormity of the unrealized losses and the financial hole in the bank’s accounts would not have existed if not for ultra-loose monetary policy. Let me explain why.

As of December 31, 2022, Silicon Valley Bank had approximately $209.0 billion in total assets and about $175.4 billion in total deposits, according to their public accounts. Their top shareholders are Vanguard Group (11.3 percent), BlackRock (8.1 percent), State Street (5.2 percent) and the Swedish pension fund Alecta (4.5 percent).

The incredible growth and success of SVB could not have happened without negative rates, ultra-loose monetary policy, and the tech bubble that burst in 2022. Furthermore, the bank’s liquidity event could not have happened without the regulatory and monetary policy incentives to accumulate sovereign debt and mortgage-backed securities (MBS).

SVB’s asset base read like the clearest example of the old mantra “Don’t fight the Fed.” SVB made one big mistake: follow exactly the incentives created by loose monetary policy and regulation.

What happened in 2021? Massive success that, unfortunately, was also the first step to demise. The bank’s deposits nearly doubled with the tech boom. Everyone wanted a piece of the unstoppable new tech paradigm. SVB’s assets also rose and almost doubled.

The bank’s assets rose in value. More than 40 percent were long-dated Treasurys and MBS. The rest were seemingly world-conquering new tech and venture capital investments.

Most of those “low risk” bonds and securities were held to maturity. SVB was following the mainstream rulebook: low-risk assets to balance the risk in venture capital investments. When the Federal Reserve raised interest rates, SVB must have been shocked.

Its entire asset base was a single bet: low rates and quantitative easing for longer. Tech valuations soared in the period of loose monetary policy, and the best way to “hedge” that risk was with Treasurys and MBS. Why bet on anything else? This is what the Fed was buying in billions every month. These were the lowest-risk assets according to all regulations, and, according to the Fed and all mainstream economists, inflation was purely “transitory,” a base-effect anecdote. What could go wrong?

Inflation was not transitory, and easy money was not endless.

Rate hikes happened. And they caught the bank suffering massive losses everywhere. Goodbye, bonds and MBS prices. Goodbye, “new paradigm” tech valuations. And hello, panic. A good old bank run, despite the strong recovery of SVB shares in January. Mark-to-market unrealized losses of $15 billion were almost 100 percent of the bank’s market capitalization. Wipeout.

As the bank manager said in the famous South Park episode: “Aaaaand it’s gone.” SVB showed how quickly the capital of a bank can dissolve in front of our eyes.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) will step in, but that is not enough because only 3 percent of SVB deposits were under $250,000. According to Time magazine, more than 85 percent of Silicon Valley Bank’s deposits were not insured.

It gets worse. One-third of US deposits are in small banks, and around half are uninsured, according to Bloomberg. Depositors at SVB will likely lose most of their money, and this will also create significant uncertainty in other entities.

SVB was the poster boy of banking management by the book. They followed a conservative policy of acquiring the safest assets—long-dated Treasury bills—as deposits soared.

SVB did exactly what those that blamed the 2008 crisis on “deregulation” recommended. SVB was a boring, conservative bank that invested its rising deposits in sovereign bonds and mortgage-backed securities, believing that inflation was transitory, as everyone except us, the crazy minority, repeated.

SVB did nothing but follow regulation, monetary policy incentives, and Keynesian economists’ recommendations point by point. SVB was the epitome of mainstream economic thinking. And mainstream killed the tech star.

Many will now blame greed, capitalism, and lack of regulation, but guess what? More regulation would have done nothing because regulation and policy incentivize buying these “low risk” assets. Furthermore, regulation and monetary policy are directly responsible for the tech bubble. The increasingly elevated valuations of unprofitable tech and the allegedly unstoppable flow of capital to fund innovation and green investments would never have happened without negative real rates and massive liquidity injections. In the case of SVB, its phenomenal growth in 2021 was a direct consequence of the insane monetary policy implemented in 2020, when the major central banks increased their balance sheet to $20 trillion as if nothing would happen.

SVB is a casualty of the narrative that money printing does not cause inflation and can continue forever. They embraced it wholeheartedly, and now they are gone.

SVB invested in the entire bubble of everything: Sovereign bonds, MBS, and tech. Did they do it because they were stupid or reckless? No. They did it because they perceived that there was very little to no risk in those assets. No bank accumulates risk in an asset it believes is high risk. The only way in which banks accumulate risk is if they perceive that there is none. Why do they perceive no risk? Because the government, regulators, central banks, and the experts tell them there is none. Who will be next?

Many will blame everything except the perverse incentives and bubbles created by monetary policy and regulation, and they will demand rate cuts and quantitative easing to solve the problem. It will only worsen. You do not solve the consequences of a bubble with more bubbles.

The demise of Silicon Valley Bank highlights the enormity of the problem of risk accumulation by political design. SVB did not collapse due to reckless management, but because they did exactly what Keynesians and monetary interventionists wanted them to do. Congratulations.

About the Author:

Daniel Lacalle, PhD, economist and fund manager, is the author of the bestselling books Freedom or Equality (2020), Escape from the Central Bank Trap (2017), among others.

Lacalle was ranked as one of the top twenty most influential economists in the world in 2016 and 2017 by Richtopia. He holds the CIIA financial analyst title, with a postgraduate degree in higher business studies and a master’s degree in economic investigation.

Biotech Announcement Sends Stock Up 258%

Posted on March 13, 2023March 13, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

The Power of Small Companies Highlighted in Today’s Biopharma Announcements

Business headlines surrounding Silicon Valley Bank and its customers may take some time to fade from the front page. In the meantime, looking past them, there are some positive news and developments. Two news items involve announcements by biotech/pharmaceutical companies this week. One is a deal you don’t have to dig too deep to find, Pfizer (PFE), the pharmaceutical behemoth, is looking to acquire Seagen (SGEN) for $43 billion. The second is a smaller deal and has been crowded off many newsfeeds. Provention Bio (PRVB) is expected to be purchased by Sanofi (SNY) a large French-based pharmaceutical company.

Seagen shares increased 17% in the first hour of trading after the Pfizer announcement, shares of Provention were up 258% the same morning after the Sanofi announcement. Below is a chart of the month-to-date performance of the two that are to be acquired.

The Power of Flying Below the Radar

Seagen is a borderline household name and has been a known acquisition target for some time. Just last July, Merck offered 40 billion for the company, this known interest in the company has kept the price elevated. Shifting the focus on the power of smaller, less talked about companies, they often have more potential for larger gains because they are less known. And while the numbers ($43 billion vs $2.9 billion) don’t make for compelling headlines, the numbers in the graph above demonstrate the impact can be far more compelling to investors.

The Provention Bio Deal

Sanofi and Provention Bio, a U.S.-based, publicly traded biopharmaceutical company focused on preventing autoimmune diseases, including type 1 diabetes (T1D), entered into an agreement for Sanofi to acquire Provention Bio, Inc., for $25.00 per share in cash.

Under the terms of the agreement, Sanofi will begin a cash tender offer to acquire all outstanding shares of Provention Bio.

The actual completion of the tender is subject to standard conditions, including the tendering of a number of shares of Provention Bio, Inc. common stock that, together with shares already owned by Sanofi or its affiliates, represents at least a majority of the outstanding shares of Provention Bio, Inc. common stock.

If the tender offer is successfully completed, then a wholly owned subsidiary of Sanofi will merge with and into Provention Bio, Inc., and all of the outstanding Provention shares that are not tendered in the offer will be converted into the right to receive the same $25.00 per share in cash offered to Provention Bio, Inc. shareholders as part of the offer. Sanofi plans to fund the transaction with available cash. Subject to the satisfaction or waiver of customary closing conditions, Sanofi expects to complete the acquisition in the second quarter of 2023.

Worth Noting

The largest pharmaceutical companies developed huge cash “war chests” during the pandemic era. While they are prudent and tactical when deciding to grow through acquisition, the earnings on much of their cash stockpiles relative to inflation may be erosive to the pool’s purchasing power. Additionally, many small pharmaceutical and biotech companies that are developing tomorrow’s next wonder drugs are short the cash they need to drive their R&D to the finish line, and then to market. It’s presumed these companies are quietly being reviewed for a possible fit by big pharma. Big pharma’s current patents are also being eroded by time as each day they approach patent expiration. This is added incentive for these large companies to be actively looking for future merger and acquisition targets.

Smaller companies, for their part want their progress and potential more known. It is only through being known, and the more broadly the better, that investors of all types understand the work they do and the potential along with the risk they hold. These companies often hire the service of impartial, highly credible equity analysts to provide details of the pipeline and the successes and challenges of the company. This company-sponsored research provides investors with a third-party window into the company. The window is, at times, as basic as the idea that investors need to know enough about the existence of a small company to want to own shares. Greater investor interest typically increases liquidity which could help the company continue moving forward and developing its products.

Channelchek houses quality company-sponsored research. For Life Sciences company-sponsored research covered by FINRA licensed Sr. Analyst Robert LeBoyer visit this link. For Healthcare Services Sr. Analyst Gregory Aurand visit this link.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

The Week Ahead – SVB Contagion Concerns, CPI Inflation, FOMC Blackout

Posted on March 13, 2023March 13, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Reasons Investors Should Beware the Ides of March

The FDIC, no doubt, was working overtime this weekend trying to find a suitor for Silicon Valley Bank. The bank’s demise makes it the second-largest bank in US history to have not managed its risks well enough to survive. Investors, depositors, and other interested parties have been awakened and are now checking their own likelihood of overexposure to banks. Some of this exposure could be through investments in companies that had uninsured deposits at SVB.

One risk that may be impacting investors’ psyche now is recollections of 2008 and viewing last Friday’s bank closure as the canary (or Lehman Bros.) in the coal mine. Whether this is a singular incident or just the beginning of escalating problems remains to be seen. But investors tend to always look back on the most recent similar event then think “here we go again.” Important economic numbers aside, such as CPI on Tuesday, or Residential Construction on Thursday, the loudest news will be centered on SVB and whether the Fed will now pivot.

The Fed and regional Presidents have been in a blackout period since Saturday; this is normal leading up to an FOMC meeting (March 21-22). However, this blackout period has been partially breached with a joint statement between Fed Chair Powell and Treasury Secretary Yellen, who incidentally was his predecessor. Keep an eye on Channelchek news postings for more information on this statement.

Monday 3/13

No Economic numbers are to be released

Tuesday 3/14

6:00 AM ET, The Small Business Optimism index has been below the historical average of 98 for 13 months in a row. The small business optimism index comes a monthly survey that is by the National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB). The index is a composite of 10 seasonally adjusted components based on the following questions: plans to increase employment, plans to make capital outlays, plans to increase inventories, expect the economy to improve, expect real sales higher, current inventory, current job openings, expected credit conditions, now a good time to expand, and earnings trend.
8:30 AM ET, Consumer Price Index (CPI), investors now lay awake waiting for inflation reports. For February, core prices are expected to hold steady at an elevated 0.4 percent monthly gain, with overall prices also expected to rise 0.4 percent after January’s 0.5 percent rise. Annual rates, which in January were 6.4 percent overall and 5.6 percent for the core, are expected at 6.0 and 5.5 percent.

Wednesday 3/15

8:30 AM ET, Producer Price Index (PPI), this measure of wholesale inflation ought to be the second most market-impacting number of the week. After rising a sharper-than-expected 0.7 percent in January, producer prices in February are expected to slow to a monthly 0.3 percent. The annual rate in February is seen at 5.4 percent versus January’s 6.0 percent. February’s ex-food ex-energy rate is seen at 0.4 percent on the month and 5.2 percent on the year versus January’s 0.5 and 5.4 percent, both of which were also sharper than expected.
10:00 AM ET, The Housing Market Index jumped 4 points in January and another 7 points in February but further improvement, given a sharp rise in mortgage rates, is not expected for March where the consensus is a 1 point decline to 41.
10:00 AM ET, Business Inventories in January are expected to remain unchanged following 0.3 percent builds in both December and November. Rising inventories can be an indication of business optimism that sales will be growing in the coming months. By looking at the ratio of inventories to sales, investors can see whether production demands will expand or contract in the near future. On the other hand, if unintended inventory accumulation occurs then production will probably need to slow while current inventories are worked down. This is why business inventory data is a forward indicator.
10:00 AM ET, Atlanta Fed Business Inflation Expectations is was previously 2.9%. The percentage provides a monthly measure of year-ahead inflation expectations and inflation uncertainty from the perspective of firms. John Williams the President of the New York Fed will be speaking.

Thursday 3/16

8:30 AM ET, Housing Starts in February is expected to come in flat at 1.315 million. Permits that were 1.339 million in January, are also seen flat at 1.340 million.
8:30 AM ET, Jobless Claims for the March 11 week are expected to come in at 205,000 versus 211,000 in the prior week.

Friday 3/17

10:00 AM ET, Consumer Sentiment is expected to repeat at a depressed 67.0.
10:00 AM ET, the Index Leading Economic Indicators is expected to fall a further 0.2 percent in February. This index has been in severe decline though contraction did slow in January to minus 0.3 percent. It seldom moves markets as most of the components that make it up are already known.

What Else

The clock change ought to cause some traders to be more tired than normal. However, all will be looking to see the FDIC’s plans for SVB.

The markets have been a stock pickers market since January 2022. The consensus is that the stock indices will be weak after a strong January and bonds, according to the Fed itself, face strong monetary policy headwinds. Yet, inflation is high and therefore so are the detrimental erosive effects of price increases. So remaining in cash is like accepting a buying power loss.

For institutional or individual investors in New York or South Florida, there may be the opportunity to listen to the management of some interesting companies (no cost). The company that Michael Burry recently owned, GEO Group ($GEO) will be holding a luncheon roadshow in NYC on March 14. This is an interesting company with political policy headwinds and extreme historical positives. Get more information here on attending. Another interesting opportunity for investors to meet and question management of a company that doesn’t necessarily wilt with economic weakness is the breakfast (Boca Raton, FL) or lunch (Miami, FL) meetings with 1(800) FLOWERS ($FLWS). Register to see if there are still open seats here.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Details of The New Bank Term Funding Program (BTFP)

Posted on March 13, 2023March 13, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

FDIC, Federal Reserve, and Treasury Issue Joint Statements on Silicon Valley Bank

In a joint statement released by Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen, Federal Reserve Board Chair Jerome H. Powell, and FDIC Chairman Martin J. Gruenberg, they announced actions they are now committed to taking to “protect the U.S. economy by strengthening public confidence in the banking system.” The actions are being taken to ensure that “the U.S. banking system continues to perform its vital roles of protecting deposits and providing access to credit to households and businesses in a manner that promotes strong and sustainable economic growth.”

Specifically, the actions directly impact two banks, Silicon Valley Bank in California and Signature Bank in New York, but it was made clear that it could be extended to other institutions. The joint news release reads, “After receiving a recommendation from the boards of the FDIC and the Federal Reserve and consulting with the President, Secretary Yellen approved actions enabling the FDIC to complete its resolution of Silicon Valley Bank, Santa Clara, California, in a manner that fully protects all depositors. Depositors will have access to all of their money starting Monday, March 13. No losses associated with the resolution of Silicon Valley Bank will be borne by the taxpayer.

In a second release by the three agencies, details were uncovered as to how this was designed to not impact depositors, with losses being borne by stockholders and debtholders. The release reads as follows:

“The additional funding will be made available through the creation of a new Bank Term Funding Program (BTFP), offering loans of up to one year in length to banks, savings associations, credit unions, and other eligible depository institutions pledging U.S. Treasuries, agency debt and mortgage-backed securities, and other qualifying assets as collateral. These assets will be valued at par. The BTFP will be an additional source of liquidity against high-quality securities, eliminating an institution’s need to quickly sell those securities in times of stress.

With approval of the Treasury Secretary, the Department of the Treasury will make available up to $25 billion from the Exchange Stabilization Fund as a backstop for the BTFP. The Federal Reserve does not anticipate that it will be necessary to draw on these backstop funds.

After receiving a recommendation from the boards of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Federal Reserve, Treasury Secretary Yellen, after consultation with the President, approved actions to enable the FDIC to complete its resolutions of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank in a manner that fully protects all depositors, both insured and uninsured. These actions will reduce stress across the financial system, support financial stability and minimize any impact on businesses, households, taxpayers, and the broader economy.

The Board is carefully monitoring developments in financial markets. The capital and liquidity positions of the U.S. banking system are strong and the U.S. financial system is resilient.”

Take Away

Confidence by depositors, investors, and all economic participants is important for those entrusted to keep the U.S. economy steady. The measures appear to strive for the markets to open on Monday with more calm than might otherwise have occurred.

While the sense of resolve of the steps explained in the two statements, both released at 6:15 ET Sunday evening is reminiscent of 2008, there is still no expectation that the problem is wider than a few institutions.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources:

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20230312b.htm

https://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/pressreleases/monetary20230312a.htm

Stock Market Prices Have Been Demonstrated to Be Impacted by Daylight Savings Time

Posted on March 10, 2023March 10, 2023 by phoffman@channelchek.com

Stock are Less Likely to Spring Ahead for Daylight Savings Time

Alan Greenspan once made a brief comment saying that there is a correlation between sales of mens underwear and difficult markets ahead. Apparently, the Great Maestro, could support his data with an elasticity of demand chart. The data showed that sales in underpants were extremely consistent, except just before a recession. Another stock market correlation (with likely causation), is daylight savings time and stock prices. This has been the subject of another time-consuming study of numbers by a couple of Yale College professors.

With all stock market traders eager to develop an edge in the market, over time there has been a growing interest in the impact of external factors on the stock market. A study titled “Losing Sleep at the Market: The Daylight-Savings Anomaly,” conducted by Matthew J. Kotchen and Laura E. Grant from Yale University. It explored the impact of DST on stocks. The study found that DST may have a negative impact on the market during the first week after the time change.

Kotchen and Grant’s study focused on the impact of DST on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) from 1964 to 2012. They found that during the first week after the springtime change to DST, stock prices tended to dip. This effect was most pronounced on the Monday following the time change, with an average decrease of 0.31% in stock prices. This effect was observed even after controlling for other factors that may have affected the stock market.

One possible explanation for this phenomenon is that the disruption to people’s sleep patterns may affect their productivity and decision-making abilities. This could lead to a decrease in trading activity and a temporary decline in stock prices. Another explanation is that the time change may lead to a decrease in trading volume due to confusion or technical glitches.

It’s worth noting that the effect of DST on the stock market, while statistically significant, is not very large and normally short-lived. The study found that the negative impact on stock prices disappeared after the first week, and there was no significant impact during the fall transition out of DST.

While Kotchen and Grant’s study sheds light on the impact of DST on the stock market, it’s important to keep in mind that many other factors have a much greater impact on stock prices. Economic indicators, political events, and company earnings reports are just a few examples of factors that can affect the stock market. Investors should not view this as significant enough to trade off of.

Take Away

“Losing Sleep at the Market: The Daylight-Savings Anomaly” suggests that DST may have a small, temporary negative impact on the stock market during the first week after the time change. However, the overall impact of DST on the stock market is likely to be small compared to other factors that affect stock prices.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Sources

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/04/08/recession-signals-these-unusual-indicators-may-be-worth-monitoring.html

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=208623

OpenAI. Retrieved March 10, 2023