Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

LINK: The end of the EM bull.

This article sounds grim, particularly for EM. Things maybe will crater shortly, but... long-term, and forever? What happened to the logic that, given the USA QE, the dollar's value has been diluted, watered-down, reduced and otherwise made feeble? Or am I reading too much into words that are intended to sound urgent, so that the writer can convince readers that he knows what he's talking about?
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100798026

Comments

  • "I think we're looking at a very problematic future for any kind of investment."

    Well now, there's a nuanced view of things! I'm no optimist, but even I'm not that negative. Let's wait until September or October, when hopefully we'll know who's running the Fed and what they intend to do, then maybe ease back in as the opportunity arises.
  • edited June 2013
    Yes, when my ship comes in here shortly in early July, if I see everything still falling in value, I just might wait to deploy that money.
  • edited June 2013
    I will be happy to add here-and-there to long-term EM positions (some fund, more focus on single names) if EM markets come down further. There are going to be bumps around the world (and the US will not be immune) and I continue to believe in EM growth over the long-term. Brazil stuff has been creamed in particular (I'm looking at ABV and maybe SBS.)
  • edited June 2013
    Reply to @scott: I tried to buy this yesterday ,but Fidelity wanted an additional $50.00 in Transaction Fees.Is this standard in the industry?
    https://www.google.com/finance?q=OTCMKTS:APAJF&ei=l9C5UejdDcrzqwGa2AE&ed=us
  • edited June 2013
    Reply to @TSP_Transfer: Some brokerages do charge fees for foreign ordinary share purchases (tickers ending in F). One I know doesn't even tell you the fees - you are just charged a random fee later on. It is not surprising that there is not that much trading in foreign ordinaries because of the fees (which, from my understanding, can vary wildly depending on country and broker.) $50 seems unusually steep and I wouldn't pay that much for anything in terms of stock commission.

    Unfortunately, APA Group does not have ADR shares (which would not charge a fee - those shares end in Y)

    APA Is an interesting company - it has a dominant position in nat gas infrastructure in Australia. I am a little concerned short-to-mid term about Australia, but if one has a long-term view, APA is really a dominant company in important infrastructure in the country. Interesting assets, nice dividend, pretty consistent.

    APA is a few % of INF, but that's definitely not saying that INF is a substitute, as INF is leveraged and can be volatile. However, INF (Brookfield Global Infrastructure) is a broad infrastructure fund and pays a dividend monthly vs quarterly.

    I have no interest in adding any more infrastructure, but am not selling. I had entertained buying Hutchison Port Holdings briefly, but would rather just buy diversified parent Hutchison Whampoa (HUWHY) if I was going to go that route. The parent company has continued to remain undervalued and I've owned it before; I think it has great assets (everything from a giant health/beauty chain to a Canadian energy company to telecom to ports around the world) but do not currently own it because it is too volatile and I grew admittedly impatient with it.
  • How many times have we heard this sort of bleak prediction for EMs? Every time there is a selloff of EM stocks, this gets trotted out by someone. It would be nice if some of these so-called Asia experts would acknowledge that China is no longer an emerging market. It is becoming more and more a developed market, particularly in light of where its GDP has its gains. For the last two years we have been told that Europe is a disaster and the euro is likely to collapse. Buy golly, gee...there are whole lot of multi-national companies based in Europe that are doing just fine. If this writer thinks all EMs are trash, where does she think growth WILL be? Everything goes through cycles, and unless someone is darned good at timing getting in and out of sectors/countries/regions (and I have never met anyone who can do this consistently), a diversified portfolio that strives to match risk and reward goals still seems logical. There will always bee hordes that jump in and out of markets. That's why long-term investment surveys show such awful average returns.
  • Reply to @BobC: Thank you, exactly. Great post.
  • Reply to @BobC: Certainly agree BobC.Have trusted Matthews and Wasatch with my EM money(about 20% of R'tirement funds.Continue to $ cost ave.) Most managers certainly factor in the political risk as in:

    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/06/13/us-argentina-economy-insight-idUSBRE95C04T20130613?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews
  • Reply to @BobC: Yer talkin' too much sense to ignore. Thanks.
  • BobC, excellent post. Anyone with a long term outlook should continue with Asia and/or buy the dips. There is still lots of growth to come as the middle class forms and expands which will fuel autos, tech, and real estate. One fact that has always garnered my attention is the savings rate of the people. A 20% rate is not uncommon compared to the US which has a pathetic savings rate.

    All growth periods have their hiccups.
  • Reply to @JohnChisum: Good points!
  • I own the Brazilian Homebuilder Gafisa GFA and have been crushed. Hoping for a World Cup and Olympic turnaround :).
  • Reply to @JohnChisum:Income Inequality Debate Here! Check the statement that 12 families control 85% of weath in the Philippines. Could not cut and paste but ;
    http://www.asianinvestor.net/News/346826,no-need-to-fear-asean-correction-says-invesco.aspx
  • Reply to @TSP_Transfer: 12 families. Surely, "EXTENDED families" is intended. Aunts, cousins.... There is indeed an extreme, built-in, taken-for-granted culture of greed, graft and corruption there. A little payola wherever you go makes things happen a lot more quickly for you, whatever you may need. (So, you passed your driver's test. You'll get your license in 90 days. Oh, but I can't wait THAT long... And the person you're dealing with, who represents their equivalent of the DMV, just smiles...... Waiting for an offer...) I've seen it in very many ways. Wifey is from there. So a handful of surnames controls the lion's share of the wealth: agricultural land, San Miguel Brewery, Philippine Airlines. And all the rest. Yes, I'm SURE that's quite true.

    .....Which is to say that the current President in the Philippines is trying to "clean house" in the face of monumental opposition on all sides. Kinda like Pres. Obama trying to get anything done. Even the poorest of the poor over there support the Fat Cats, against their own best interests. Why? Because of the extensive sense of fatalism. If God did not want me poor, I would not be this way... In the meantime, they feel lucky if the Fat Cats throw them a bone--- though they are literally selling themselves short, cutting themselves off at the knees, rather than to stand up and insist on some honesty and fairness.

    .....But none of what's going on is illegal, which is WHY a mere 12 surnames control 85% of the wealth in The Philippines. And the Markets are going to do whatever they are going to do, regardless---illustrating the difference between the way our System operates on the one hand, and what's ethical, on the other.
  • Reply to @TSP_Transfer: The oft-cited figure for the U.S. is that one family controls as much wealth as 40% of the population; not sure what total percentage that represents.
  • Reply to @AndyJ: Wealth distribution will continue to be a topic/debate/political headline in the USA for the forseeable future.As investors we should be vigilant to the chances that the concentration of wealth in EM countries will lead to revolution or civil war in the extreme or an 'Asian Spring".
  • Reply to @TSP_Transfer: I have no doubt that 12 families control 85% of the wealth in the Philippines. This happened over a long period of time and I believe the same circumstance happens in other EMs too. Thailand has some very rich families for example.

    Max hit the nail on the head. The graft and corruption is so ingrained in the society that it has become normal. The people here are so desperate they will choose the instant gratification over long term change. A political candidate can promise free rice and garner support from the poor. Free rice lasts for a meal or two though. Investing in the infrastructure lasts much longer. There is a shift in the economic structure happening here. The overseas workers are sending money back home and a middle class has started to form. These same overseas workers see what is happening in other countries with regards to infrastructure and they are demanding the same in the Philippines.

    My wife is also from here so I can see the changes up front. Even in the past ten years, there has been a solid change. From no Starbucks anywhere to stores where 15-20 people are standing in line to buy their coffee. TGI-Fridays opens a restaurant and it is doing booming business. Ayala builds a 24 story condo and it sells out in less than 6 months When the private families invest their money in these sorts of ventures they are flourishing. Compare that to the government spending. Airports are a sore subject here. Manila's airport is considered the worst in the world. I have been through there numerous times and I don't disagree with that statement one bit. They should let Ayala or another family build a new airport. Roads and highways are pitiful. The reason is that the government is focused more on social spending than they are on infrastructure spending. Slightly off topic but the USA made that shift years ago when LBJ raided Social Security for his Guns and Butter campaign. But that is a topic for another thread.

    I would want those 12 families to continue to invest in the Philippines rather than heading elsewhere with their money.

    Good discussion.
  • Even if investors don't own a dedicated EM equity fund, they likely have significant EM exposure in their portfolios as the S&P 500 companies and large European companies derive over 25% and 30%, respectively, of their revenues from emerging market countries. And these EM revenues have been increasing rapidly over the past few years.

    Kevin
  • Reply to @Old_Joe: Always fascinating to track these statements back.

    Uwe Parpart is a heavyweight in international finance and formerly of Kantor Fitzgerald, which sued him when he and three colleagues left for ReOrient. (He won). He's also author of "Death of the Asian Growth Model with the 2008 Financial Crisis" (2008), source of the prediction that "at this rate, the euro will lurch toward parity with the US dollar and through it before year-end, then disintegrate" (2010) and that Shanghai stocks would be sold directly to foreign investors by October or November, 2011 (2011).

    He's currently a managing director of ReOrient Financial Markets, formerly Asia TeleMedia, Ltd. ReOrient sells investment advice and trading services to the very rich. That includes private placements, which is seen as an alternative to investing in public securities (which are, we're told, "very problematic"). 80% of ReOrient is owned by Gainhigh Holdings Limited, an investment holding company domiciled in the British Virgin Islands. All of Gainhigh Holdings is owned by Ko Chun Shun (called Johnson Ko). Mr. Ko is a serial entrepreneur who runs China Windpower Group, an investment holding company.

    Bright guy with a smudgy crystal ball, talking his book?

    David
  • Reply to @BobC: I had a chance to listen to David Herro answers a few questions at a breakfast last week, sponsored by Litman Gregory. (Bracing coffee - about the consistency of motor oil - but sucky snackage.) Herro notes that he had 20% of his flagship in the emerging markets in the late 90s, then backed down to zero as those markets were hit by "a wave of indiscriminate inflows." He agrees that emerging markets will "be the propellant of global economic growth for the next 20 years" but, being a bright guy, warns that you still need to find "good businesses at good prices." He hasn't seen any in several years but, at this rate, "maybe in a year we'll be back in."

    His current stance is that a stock needs to have 40-50% upside to get into his portfolio today and "some of the better quality e.m. firms are within 10-15% of getting in." He seemed impressed, in particular, with the quality of management teams in Latin America ("those guys are really experienced with handling adversity") but skeptical of the Chinese newbies ("they're still a little dodgy").

    He also announced a bias "against reserve currencies." That is, he thinks you're better off buying earnings which are not denominated in dollars, Euros or yen. His co-presenter, Matt Eagan of Loomis Sayles, has the same bias. He's been short the yen but long the Nikkei.

    Which is to say, folks with long track records and long investment horizons seem a bit less skittish than does CNBC. Go figure.

    David

Sign In or Register to comment.