Quote of the day

“I find economics increasingly satisfactory, and I think I am rather good at it.”– John Maynard Keynes

Sunday, 13 October 2019

READ THIS! Discussion Monday

Germany hits the skids

Europe’s biggest economy is reeling from trade wars, Brexit and the drive for electric cars. Will Merkel turn on the taps? Don’t bank on it, says Peter Conradi
The Sunday Times, 
Share
Save
As several hundred of the great and good of the German car industry held their annual get-together last week in Nürtingen, a small town outside Stuttgart, there was little to lighten the mood.
The past few months have not been kind to the companies behind Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Volkswagen and Porsche. Still paying the price for their role in the Dieselgate emissions scandal that has hung like a noxious cloud over the industry for four years, the car-makers now face a global trade war alongside the uncertainties of Brexit.
Looming above everything is the transition from a century-long reliance on petrol and diesel power to electric traction, which has so far been led not from their traditional strongholds of Munich or Wolfsburg, but by Silicon Valley upstart Tesla and from the Far East.
“What is going on at the moment is brutal for us,” Peter Schwarzenbauer, a member of BMW’s board, told bosses at Nürtingen. “We have always faced headwinds but in the past there was also the possibility of compensating for them.”
“We can’t be under any illusions,” agreed Jürgen Stackmann, head of sales for Volkswagen. “The next years are going to be tough.”
It is not just the car-makers — which, together with suppliers, employ about 830,000 people across Germany — facing such headwinds. The mood across swathes of industry in Europe’s biggest economy is increasingly grim as indicator after indicator points to a country teetering on the edge of recession.
Underlying it is a more fundamental question: is the export-driven model that has fuelled Germany’s astonishing economic success over the past decades nearing the end of the road?
The latest batch of official statistics, although contradictory, gave little cause for cheer. Optimism provoked on Tuesday by an unexpectedly upbeat 0.3% rise in German industrial production in August proved short-lived.
Two days later came the news that exports in the same month had dropped by 1.8% (on a seasonally adjusted basis), steeper than expected and the sharpest decline since April. Industrial orders were down in August, too, largely on weaker domestic demand.
We have to wait for the release of September’s gross domestic product figures to know whether the German economy has formally entered negative territory for the first time in six years, but the outlook is not good. “We will [probably] have a contraction in GDP in the third quarter, and thus a recession,” Uwe Burkert, economist at LBBW bank, told Reuters.
The immediate cause of Germany’s malaise lies in the worsening global economy, sparked in large part by Donald Trump’s trade war against China, which is now spreading to Europe.
If Beijing carries out its threat to reimpose 25% tariffs on American cars, Mercedes-Benz, which builds the 4x4s it sells to China in Alabama, and BMW, which exports its models from a plant in South Carolina, will be among the hardest hit. German exporters face further pain as a result of this month’s World Trade Organisation ruling allowing America to impose tariffs on EU goods — also up to 25% — in retaliation for subsidies paid by European governments to Airbus that it has deemed illegal.
Then there is Brexit. German exports to the UK plunged by €3.5bn (£3.1bn) in the first half of this year. Britain, which as recently as 2016 was the country’s fifth-biggest trading partner, has dropped to 13th place, behind Poland, according to Holger Bingmann, president of the BGA, a trade federation.
A hard Brexit would have “catastrophic consequences for German foreign trade”, he warned last week.
The longer-term impact of Britain’s departure could be even more damaging: like other EU countries, Germany fears competition from a buccaneering, lightly regulated “Singapore on Thames”.
It has so far been left largely to the European Central Bank (ECB) to attempt to break up the storm clouds that have been gathering not only over the German economy but, by extension, over much of the eurozone. Its president, Mario Draghi, in one of his last acts before stepping down at the end of this month, cut interest rates from -0.4% to -0.5% and announced a resumption of quantitative easing (QE), vowing to buy €20bn of bonds a month until inflation climbs back up to the 2% target.
The move has been much criticised — including, it emerged last week, by experts on the ECB’s own monetary policy committee, who wrote a letter to Draghi and other members of the bank’s governing council days before their decision last month, warning them against resuming bond purchases.
With interest rates already so far into negative territory, critics fear a further loosening of monetary policy could provide little or no boost to the eurozone economy. The onus, they argue, is instead on countries with strong public finances — namely Germany and Holland — to give their countries a fiscal boost by taxing less or spending more.
Germany, on track to run a budget surplus for the sixth year running — a rarity among the world’s largest economies — certainly has the scope to open the sluices. It is not just outsiders — such as French President Emmanuel Macron, who ruffled feathers in April by asking whether the German economic model had “perhaps run its course” — who are urging it to do so.
Such sentiments are also heard these days within Angela Merkel’s ruling Christian Democrats. A paper published last month by the Union of the Middle, a centrist group within the party, called on the government to spend more, especially on infrastructure — much of which, from broadband provision to roads and bridges, is in surprisingly poor shape.
The response from Chancellor Merkel so far has been a resounding “nein”. Pursuit of the schwarze null (black zero) — a balanced budget — is an article of faith among the German Establishment since a “debt brake” imposing a strict limit on borrowing by both the federal government and those of its 16 states was added to the constitution in 2009, in the wake of the financial crisis.
Surprisingly, perhaps, one of the firmest advocates of fiscal orthodoxy is the finance minister, Olaf Scholz, who is from the Social Democrats, the junior partner in Merkel’s coalition.
The German economy has weathered past crises and may be able to get over this one too, especially if Trump scales back his trade war and — as began to appear more likely this weekend — a Brexit deal is done.
Yet the slowdown has also raised broader concerns about the longer-term viability of an economic model that has become heavily dependent on exporting cars and other manufactured goods to China and America.
Almost two-thirds of Germany’s Dax 30 index is made up of “old economy” industries such as machine tools, chemicals, cars and finance, compared with just 40% in the US, noted Jörg Zeuner, chief economist of Union Investment. He added: “Germany feels the impact of weakening world trade more than others — and has turned into the economic tail-light of the eurozone.”
The country’s car-makers, slow to climb on the electric bandwagon, are playing catch-up. Last month’s Frankfurt motor show saw Volkswagen launch its first purpose-built electric car, the ID.3, which it says will ultimately be as important as the Beetle or Golf. Mercedes dazzled with a sleek, battery-powered concept version of its flagship S-class.
Yet, while the internal combustion engine showcases Germany’s traditional engineering skills, the heart — and as much as half the cost — of an electric car is its battery, a sector dominated by the Chinese and other Far Eastern suppliers.
Recent years have seen a scramble to establish joint ventures between German and Asian firms, while China’s CATL, the world’s leading maker of car batteries, is about to start work on a €1.8bn plant in Arnstadt, east Germany, from which it will supply BMW and Volvo, among others.
Peter Altmaier, the economic affairs minister, and Bruno Le Maire, his French counterpart, are also pushing for European companies to go it alone, hoping to see billions of euros — some of it public money — ploughed into an Airbus-style consortium to make batteries.
However successful Germany’s move from petrol and diesel proves, margins on electric cars are lower than on traditional ones, obliging manufacturers to keep making gas guzzlers for now.
The relative simplicity of electric motors means they also require far fewer workers — a point highlighted by BMW’s Schwarzenbauer, who wondered aloud at Nürtingen about the thousands of engineers at his company who are specialists in internal combustion engines.
“We can’t simply brush away the fact that we have many workers who are really worried about what is going to happen to them,” he said.
Those headwinds do not look like easing any time soon.

Great supply-side article - investment

Pension cash could bankroll start-ups

Plan to pour £50bn into venture capital would bring higher risks and rewards
Successful start-ups such as the food service Deliveroo have relied on overseas investment
Successful start-ups such as the food service Deliveroo have relied on overseas investmentALAMY
Share
Save
Up to 5% of private sector retirement pots could be invested in venture capital funds under plans being considered by government and the pensions industry.
The move by the state-owned British Business Bank (BBB) and a group of the biggest providers of defined contribution (DC) schemes would unlock billions for promising start-ups, but potentially put retirement savings at risk.
The 5% figure is understood to have been suggested as appropriate for balancing the risk of backing young companies — many of which fail — with the upside if they go on to succeed. Assets in DC schemes are forecast to exceed £1 trillion by 2029, according to the BBB. Diverting 5% of that to venture capital firms would mean a £50bn funding boost.
The government has spent several years examining how to release some of the cash held in private sector pensions for investment in fast-growing businesses. This would help Britain mirror the large amounts of growth capital available in America and China.
Many of the country’s most successful start-ups, such as the food service Deliveroo and cyber-security developer Darktrace, have taken investment from overseas funds because the money they need is not available from those based here.
In America, 98% of venture capital funding comes from institutions such as pensions and insurance companies. It is much rarer for that to happen in Britain because of what the Treasury described last year as a “negative feedback loop”, where long-term low interest rates, a lack of skilled investors and relatively few public listings mean backing fast-growing companies is seen as a higher risk.
A report last month by the BBB and the consultancy Oliver Wyman said one way of mitigating the risk would be to create an investment vehicle to pool pension contributions in a fund of funds. The report did not rule out the possibility of investing directly in start-ups.

Friday, 4 October 2019

Are we already in recession?


Ambrose Evans Pritchard in the Daily Telegraph every Wednesday - a great read for big picture analysis.



The global manufacturing downturn is spreading to the once-resilient service sector in a string of countries, threatening to tip the world economy into a broad recession unless there is a swift response from the authorities. 
IHS Markit said the US service industry saw the sharpest drop in headcount since late 2009 last month as firms battened down the hatches and cut excess capacity. Companies are being forced to lower prices to hold onto market share.
“The US slowdown signals are multiplying,” said James Knightley from ING. “We were well aware of the problems in manufacturing given the trade war, but it is clear that there are problems brewing in other sectors. The latest developments will keep the pressure on the Federal Reserve to ease monetary policy further.”
The ISM non-manufacturing index told the same story, dropping to a three-year low with new orders suffering the most damage. Capital Economics said that the combined service and manufacturing indexes in the US are now at levels  “consistent with a recession” in the past.
Germany’s service sector finally buckled as well in September after seeming to shrug off the manufacturing slump and the crisis in the car industry for most of this year. The inflows of new work are falling in absolute terms. "The slowdown was even worse than first feared. A technical recession now looks to be all but confirmed,” said IHS Markit.
While the eurozone as a whole is still above water, service growth is barely enough to offset the industrial contraction. The currency bloc is now perched on the boom-bust line and vulnerable to the slightest economic shock.  “There’s little doubt that winter has arrived for Europe, but the big question now is whether it is mild or harsh,” said Nomura.
The chart has 1 X axis displaying Time. Range: 2016-10-20 08:38:24 to 2019-10-10 15:21:36.
The chart has 1 Y axis displaying Values. Range: 50 to 62.5.
The Federal Reserve still has room to cut interest rates and relaunch quantitative easing but it may have waited too long to preempt metastasis as the economic cycle sputters out, given the long lags before monetary stimulus filters through.

The Powell Fed has come under heavy criticism for claiming that the US economy faces no more than a ‘mid-cycle’ slowdown and requires no more than precautionary rate cuts. The deeply-inverted yield curve in the bond markets suggests that the underlying threat is more serious. Recessions begin on average nine months after the curve inverts. This episode started in May.

The Fed continued to sell bonds and shrink its balance sheet (QT) long after stresses began to emerge in the funding markets, and especially in the $2.2 trillion ‘repo’ segment that plays such a vital role in lubricating finance.

This has led to a global dollar shortage and transmitted a shock through the offshore funding markets. It has tightened conditions in Europe and Asia, and compounded the global damage from the US-China trade war. The New York Fed is now injecting liquidity but the level of excess reserves in the banking system is still too low.    

The European Central Bank is close to exhaustion under current policies and legal limits. A study by Bank of America warned that the spectre of “quantitative failure” now looms over global markets as negative rates and ever more convoluted forms of monetary stimulus start to do more harm than good.

Barnaby Martin, the bank’s credit strategist, said the ECB’s actions are becoming counter-productive. “Households and corporates are saving more not less, debt is being repaid not utilised, and banks are tightening rather than easing lending standards,” he said.

Household saving rates in the eurozone have been rising since late 2017 as people put aside more money to make up for lost interest. They have risen 1.1 percentage points in Germany to 11pc.

Companies have also been saving more, paying down debt and hoarding cash as a safety buffer. This may now be distorting eurozone money signals. Shweta Singh from TS Lombard said the seemingly robust growth of the M1 money supply  - 8.4pc year-on-year - is not as healthy as it looks.

“Firms are not raising their cash holdings in anticipation of a ramp-up in capex. Instead, they are turning increasingly cautious about access to credit. The ECB’s bank lending survey shows a tightening in loan standards for the first time since 2014,” she said.

Fiscal policy will have to take much of the strain from now on but there are barriers on both sides of the Atlantic. The US fiscal stimulus is fading and will turn to net contraction of 0.5pc of GDP (annualised) this quarter. The Democrats in Congress are in no mood to extend President Donald Trump a lifeline by agreeing to fresh round of budget largesse - except on their own political terms.

Europe has ample scope to boost spending but is hamstrung by the Stability Pact and Fiscal Compact. Any stimulus is likely to be piecemeal and too late to head off a deepening downturn.

Giovanni Zanni from Natwest Markets forecasts net fiscal expansion for eurozone as a whole of 0.4pc in 2020, led by the Netherlands (0.8pc), Germany (0.4pc), Italy (0.3pc) and France (0.1pc). Other forms of ‘quasi-fiscal’ support will ultimately kick in from green funds.

It helps but it is not enough to counter the sledge-hammer blow of a full global downturn, should that occur. Much therefore depends on Donald Trump’s state of mind as the impeachment noose tightens. 

If he opts for a quick trade deal with China and dials down his threats against Europe the relief may be enough to unleash a wave of pent-up spending by companies and to restore animal spirits worldwide.  If not, the mounting contagion from manufacturing to services may prove unstoppable.





Thursday, 3 October 2019

Nice short piece on the regions & industrial policy

By David Smith in the Sunday Times; I've highlighted key bits:

Andy Haldane, the Bank of England’s chief economist, gave an interesting speech in his capacity as chairman of the government’s industrial strategy council — reminding us that the government still has such a strategy. Speaking at St James’ Park, home of Newcastle United football club, he had some killer facts on regional income disparities.
The gap between the richest region — London and much of the southeast — and the poorest — typically the northeast and Wales — is 150%. Having narrowed between 1900 and 1980 but widened since, it is now back to the levels of the early 20th century. Regional income disparities are twice those in France and three-quarters larger than in Germany.
Haldane, who says he has been engaging in “deep hanging out” across the country in recent years, identified six factors that determine whether a place is “left behind” or not. They are: transport and connectivity; schools and education; housing and shelter; high streets and social spaces; good work and fair pay; and money and finance.
Haldane, who has tested his factors around the country, provides the example of Ashington, the town in Northumberland that was the birthplace of footballing legends Bobby and Jackie Charlton and Jackie Milburn and has its own dialect, Pitmatic.
Ashington, said Haldane, failed on all six factors. It has no train service, thanks to the Beeching cuts of more than half a century ago, and is less well-served for public transport than 70 years ago. The local school now performs well but in the town “too many people are stuck in the educational slow lane”. Its high street, despite a recent makeover, “remains a shrine to bookies, charity shops and high-cost credit providers”.
When it comes to jobs and pay, Ashington has one of the world’s most advanced paint manufacturers, but it employs only 150. Youth unemployment is above the national average and, though unemployment overall is lower than since the last pit closed in 1988, there is income insecurity. Finance is available, but much of it at punishingly high interest rates. Housing availability is an issue, as is housing quality.
What can be done? Industrial strategy is part of it, as you would expect from Haldane, but so are infrastructure and connectivity, education and skills and other factors. There is a lot to be done, and I’m not sure our politicians are capable of it.

Monday, 30 September 2019

Infrastructure spending & Monopoly power in one great article


Boris Johnson's £5bn broadband bazooka has to hit the spot



Boris Johnson's plan to speed up the roll-out of faster broadband coverage has been questioned by MPs CREDIT: JEFF OVERS/AFP


He may have been the recipient of technology lessons from his good friend Jennifer Arcuri, but even for such a dedicated student as our Prime Minister, the complexities of broadband infrastructure policy are a tough nut to crack.
Johnson’s goal is clear enough and correct. Every home should be connected to a full-fibre network as soon as possible.
Our current digital plumbing is unreliable and will relatively soon will be incapable of meeting the data demands of ordinary families, particularly those who live outside big towns and cities.
The physics of sending signals over copper mean that the further you live from a BT exchange or a streetside cabinet, the worse your broadband. Fibre optics are meanwhile unaffected by distance or bad weather.
It’s a bitter irony that those in the countryside most likely to benefit from full fibre are currently least likely to get it.
To make a case for a new network in a densely packed city or big town, investors need to be confident they will attract somewhere between 30pc and 40pc of the market.

In the countryside, however, only a monopoly works and in the most remote corners of Britain the number can never stack up. There simply aren’t enough customers to ever justify the outlay.
This is conundrum Johnson and all his technological knowledge must tackle.
As we report this week, in those most unspoilt regions the answer is relatively simple: a bazooka of public money.
Such subsidies are fraught with pitfalls and Whitehall’s record of designing structures that  ensure value for money is very poor. Yet at the moment there isn’t really any other choice.
Some might say that those parts of the country should just be left behind. After all, mains gas is not available everywhere. However, heating oil deliveries and electricity are universally available.
No similarly viable alternative currently exists for data connectivity. Leaving swathes of Britain behind as the economy is transformed by full fibre would not be tenable, especially for a Prime Minister in Johnson’s political predicament.
The calculus gets much trickier in the grey areas. These are the rural and semi-rural places where there are enough people to pay for one upgrade, but not two or three.
Nobody will currently invest commercially here, in case someone else comes along and splits the small market, destroying a fragile business case.
The taxpayer can’t be expected to bear the cost either. It should not be beyond the with of government and Ofcom to create a system that incentivises private money in this portion of Britain.
This is where the real action will be Johnson and the telecoms industry after his big subsidy announcement. Cracking this in the next few months won’t make the Prime Minister’s original target of ubiquitous full fibre coverage by 2025 achievable, but it could mean a sharp acceleration towards the goal.
On the other hand, if the Government and Ofcom get this wrong, it has no chance of delivering ubiquitous full fibre on any schedule. Number 10 knows this all too well and are signalling frustrations with colleagues at the regulator “sitting on the sidelines sucking their teeth at everything”, according to one insider.
The problem here for Ofcom and its departing chief executive Sharon White is clear. Creating a system that solves the economics of building full fibre networks everywhere ultimately will require the regulator to change its mind. 
For years now it has pursued infrastructure competition, encouraging others to build independent new networks to compete with Openreach, BT’s legally separate broadband wholesaler, and Virgin Media. It has not been a success, delivering very little progress even in big cities. In the countryside, where only monopoly economics can justify investment, it acts as a serious impediment to investment. This is a reality Ofcom must confront.
It is a big moment for the telecoms industry too. The way in which the tensions between competing interests are resolved, or not resolved, will set the tone. The futures of BT, Sky and Virgin Media, not to mention TalkTalk, Vodafone and fibre challengers backed by the likes of Goldman Sachs are in the mix. There will be losers. 
On the face of it, the proposals from Philip Jansen, the BT chief, seem reasonable. Those who want to build in town must build in the country. Yet, in part thanks to the policy of infrastructure competition, there are multiple players in the market set up to cherry-pick cities.
Hyperoptic, backed by George Soros and Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth, only does blocks of flats, and there are few in the Highlands. Virgin Media itself is very much an urban animal and has little interest in bringing cable to the shires.
The ultimate answer may be some form of joint venture that could be granted a regulated monopoly in rural areas where multiple networks would undermine the case for full fibre. Senior sources across the industry are mulling such ideas already.
There is at least a serious intent to come up with solutions. Johnson’s subsidies should build confidence, but time is not on anyone’s side.

Vodafone's deal takes a hit

The German sense of humour should be more celebrated. No sooner does Vodafone complete an €18.4bn cable takeover to create a national rival to Deutsche Telekom than teutonic politicians threaten regulatory changes that could seriously damage its business.
Vodafone Germany benefits from a strange system in which the landlords of apartment blocks in which millions live automatically add cable TV onto rent bills, and add a mark-up for themselves. Now the government is considering opening up this market when it transposes new European legislation into German law later this year.
The upshot is that as much as half of the profits of Unitymedia, the business Vodafone just acquired from Liberty Global, could be under threat for the first time.
Nearly two-thirds of parsimonious German consumers who are not locked into contracts choose free TV, according to market research.
This issue has been bubbling away in the background for some months but could soon become a big problem for the deal and Nick Read, the Vodafone chief.
For the price of Unitymedia to make sense he needs to deliver growth in Germany, challenging Deutsche Telecom with a superior broadband network and mobile bundles. The deal could end up a practical joke instead.