Intel, IBM and Mr. Market's whims
The blasé reaction to reports from 2 tech leaders proves that sometimes the market likes what it doesn't see and ignores what it can't miss.
Understanding markets is a constant battle between what you think should happen and what you think will. Not only are they quite often not the same, they can switch places out from under you, and the more you lose sight of the distinction, the more likely you are to lose money.
As a result, in order to be "right" (whatever that means), it is not enough to analyze a company correctly. You must also be correct in your analysis of how the market may react to what you find.
For example, you may spot what you deem to be a sign of positive growth tucked away in a company's financial statements, and you may conclude that the stock is undervalued. The market may view the exact same information in a negative light and punish the stock price accordingly.
Thus, you can be right about the company's prospects, but if you are wrong about how (or when) the market will respond, it may do you no good.
I bring this up as third-quarter "earnings season" is upon us, as it provides ample opportunity to see this phenomenon in real time. This week, for example, brought results from two stalwarts of the Dow ($INDU), IBM (IBM) and Intel (INTC).
Make the market shrug
IBM actually lost at beat-the-number Tuesday night, and its stock was hit for about 5% on Wednesday. Big Blue has a fairly long track record of announcing corporate earnings that don't quite "smell" right, yet the stock price is rarely affected. So even if you got the financial analysis "right" and predicted the miss, you still could easily have gotten the market's reaction wrong.
Interestingly enough, this quarter was just as smelly as usual. But this time the market cared, seemingly because the company admitted that its businesses were worse at the end of the quarter (particularly in North America), which, of course, implies that they might be a little more worse in at least part of the fourth quarter. That is about the only explanation I could come up with, because all of the squishy comparables and light revenues, while beating the number and talking about fat gross margins, were literally business as usual.
Intel also released earnings on Tuesday, and did a little better this quarter (than it had preannounced it would). But it would appear that business is going to be under pressure next quarter, as the inventory build that took place in the third quarter comes home to roost. Thus, Intel, was about 2% weaker on Wednesday.
I had hoped to get a better read on the market's mood with how Intel was treated, but the situation is just a little too murky to draw any conclusions.
Obviously, the early trading Wednesday showed that, while IBM's and Intel's stock prices declined, the market overall could not have cared less that IBM and Intel were lower, although a few hardware makers of various stripes were under a little pressure. (These are other tricky things to predict: when "company specific" results will affect related or similar companies, and when they will boost or dampen the market's animal spirits generically.)
But the Dow was essentially flat on Wednesday while its two big tech leaders were in the red, so it didn't look to me like there was a whole lot of consternation.
Latest euro-panic is over
One area where I did see a tiny bit of light being shed was in Europe, where Spain's debt market was on a tear to the upside early this week, with yields falling at one point to about 5.40%. That actually dragged Portuguese and Italian debt along as well.
The bonds of the PIIGS nations -- Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and Spain -- generically have rallied substantially lately, while the other, somewhat stronger credits have declined, with the bond markets in Europe giving a strong indication that panicked trading driven by fear of some "deflationary accident" is at an end.
The proximate cause for all of that celebratory action appeared to be expectations that a "precautionary" bond-buying program to aid Spain would come out of the European Union summit, as had been rumored. The summit ended Friday without such a deal, though hope seems to remain that the European Central Bank will still find a way to implement a similar operation.
Obviously, people can change their minds, and fear can take over again, which could occur before CB President Mario Draghi actually does become Ben Bernanke. But for now, it looks as though expectations are that Mario's money printing is going to win the battle.
Lastly, this week saw an interesting wrinkle in the currency and bond markets. On Wednesday, the dollar was weaker and is now back to the anemic (i.e., before-"deflation accident" fear trade) levels of last spring, and the bond market was also weaker. In particular, the U.S. 10-year bond traded to a yield of about 1.78%.
What you now see in the Treasury market is a small pattern of higher highs and lower lows (looking at yields from an inverted standpoint), potentially indicating that the path of least resistance for yields is up (and therefore down for bond prices).
I don't want to make too much of this, because these are very early days, but the outcome I had recently feared, of the 10-year trading below 1.60% (and breaking the pattern I just described), did not occur, and we have seen a modestly higher high. If the 10-year managed to trade over 1.87%, the case will become even stronger. If we get into a period with both a lower dollar and Treasury market, that would potentially be a very early indication of a funding crisis.
Taking a step back, I discussed in August, Draghi's idea to concoct what is now called the outright monetary transactions plan could mean the deflationary fear trade might be ending for good. If that is the case, one of the things that ought to occur is less demand for dollars and Treasurys, and the ramifications are going to be quite large, not the least of which will be even more downward pressure on Treasurys, and the dollar as well.
If we get into a period of rising rates and a declining dollar, indicating that the Fed has lost control, that won't be bullish for equities either. But we must not get too far ahead of ourselves. Thus, I don't want to make too much out of squiggles that you basically need a magnifying glass to see, yet I do want to be alert to a trend change and the problems that could result.
King World News
In my latest interview with Eric King we discussed the situation in Europe, the paralysis of politicians, and some of the inner workings of the metals market. Interested readers can listen to it here.
At the time of publication, Bill Fleckenstein did not own or control shares of any company mentioned in this column.
Working: I have to agree. I think Bill nailed it. Of all the financial pundits on msn, Bill is my favorite by far.
When are you people going to realize what money is for? It is to conduct your daily transaction such as food, clothing, & shelter.
No intelligent person holds their wealth in dollars. The dollars you earn should be used to purchase tangible and hard assets such as land, RE, stocks, bonds, Gold, Silver, and Chalupas!
As far as Bill's article is concerned, he must have been hard up for something to write. Trying to predict short or long-term fluctuations in the market or finding a reason for them is a waste of time. About all that can be said is we are in a weak economy without any truly clear direction; although, the pundits will angerly disagree with this view.
The most important thing for those who want to build wealth, is to devise a game plan. Afterwards, it would pay to study market & investor psychology always being aware that the probabilities are high you'll be wrong.
My view is a Romney victor would be a great positive for the market. An Obama would mean trouble.
Go Mitt go, we only have 17 days until you'll be the new prez!
Reply to jrlphx's statement,
When you buy gold, silver, etc., get "physical". Buying paper is only contributing to the pockets of crooks like JP Morgan (Blythe Murphy) who have the corner on the "paper commodities" market. They also inherited a huge silver short position from their shady take-over of Bear Stearns. Many accusations of illegal silver suppression are being thrown at them, including current investigations by the CFTC (run by a former Goldman Sachs exec, so don't get your hope up). Bottom line, you will lose in a paper battle, but in the long run will win with physical, because ultimately the emperor has no clothes.
I agree with koo: Vote obama and move furthur forward.
Further foward into more debt, more socialism, more gvernment dependence, more central planning, more dependent on foreign oil......
You are asking one of the biggest gold bugs (Bill Fleck) why not buy gold? I'm sure he would agree. He has been touting gold for as long as I've been reading him on MSN. This doesn't imply it is a bad strategy, but asking Bill about gold is like asking Wile E Coyote "why not have Roadrunner for dinner?"
This is crap claiming one party or the other is responsible for the direction of the market.
There is clear evidence that the polices put in place in one adminsitration have resulted in either positive or negative results in another.
Adminsitrations are usually kicked out for the condtions that existed during their terms. Oddly enough the policies that created a favorable market environment for the incoming admistration were created by the out going!
Further crap is to place any future bets on past data or events. This is why you characters are poor. You are always trying to find simple explanations to guide your market bets (yes they are bets).
And even more crap is to clearly distinguish Republicans from Democrats. They are all pretty much cut from the same cloth except for some fundamental beliefs they claim but seldom practice.
Bottom line you are all idiots!
Go Mitt go - save us from these morons!
We need a corrupt firm like Bain run by a Romney to save us.
Romney has proven corruption pays.
Most Alpha is now based on insider information, and the power to manipulate markets.
The rest is mostly Beta; correction, highly leveraged Beta.
Fed x is hiring 20,000 people, further evidence of how the economy has turned.Our
business is only a year old and we`re growing leaps and bounds.Of course we have
a good business plan and next year we`re moving to a 50,000 sq. foot facility.Business
is booming in this part of the country.
Your view is pretty blind. Markets are up through Obama's 4 years so far. They were dismal during Dubya's prior 8. No one but anally-retentive Republicans actually sees competence in Romney.
Copyright © 2013 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
ABOUT BILL FLECKENSTEIN
This column is a synopsis of Bill Fleckenstein's daily column on his website, FleckensteinCapital.com, which he's been writing on the Internet since 1996. Click here to find Fleckenstein's most recent articles.
[BRIEFING.COM] Our sector watch section indicates the technology (0.1%), industrials (0.2), health care (0.1%), and consumer discretionary (0.1%) sectors are strong. They aren't strong in an absolute sense, only in a relative sense as they are faring better than the broader market in the early going.
Overall, there hasn't been a lot of buying interest outside of some specific stocks like Conns Inc. (CONN 66.17, +7.71), which impressed with its latest earnings report and ... More
More Market News
|There’s a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.|
As the devil-may-care bravado of Wall Street marches on, history warns that -- in the end -- there will be the devil to pay.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY