Use access key #2 to skip to page content.

tmd6966 (< 20)

Reluctant Bull Market...Road to Riches or over a cliff?

Recs

6

May 16, 2009 – Comments (9) | RELATED TICKERS: WFC , LUK , SHLD

I am guilty of being the eternal optimist, and that has cost me a great deal, as I ignored the pending fallout of the subprime mess, which created a credit crunch, and turned a necessary correction into the closest thing we have seen to a depression in many of our lifetimes.

I have read the doom and gloomers, and seen them featured prominently on television.  Many of them are perma-bears who finally got one call right; others were prescient.  In my estimation, the only ones worth listening to, are the ones who actively manage money.  All the professors and self-proclaimed experts that the perma-bears love to parade as evidence, have nothing at stake, and therefore have no credibility, in my book.

Jim Rogers, an extraordinarily successful investor, mainly in commodities, and emerging markets (long before they were covered by ETF's) is one of the only investor's I respect that made the case to sell everything in the summer of 2007 when the Dow was approaching 14,000.  That call would have made you money.  That call was extraordinary, and almost universally ignored.  I ignored it, and never bothered to really wonder why such a respected investor felt so strongly that we were due for a depression-like deflation and deleveraging back when companies like AIG, FNM, FRE, LEH, BSC, WM, WCH, CFC were basking in the sunshine of a housing/mortgage reflation (thanks to Greenspan) bull market.  That was a costly mistake.  And it became the greatest learning experience of my life as an investor.

I went through a trial by fire that forced me to question every thing I thought I knew. I am now a reformed buy and holder, but I am still an avid bargain hunter, buying up unloved companies below book or the cash on their books, and selling when they approach fair value (as near as I can figure).   I am no longer afraid to sell, and book profits.  I research relentlessly, looking for a reason to sell, not buy a stock.  When trades do not work out because the facts have changed, I sell and move on, without regret. If the facts change, I will buy back a stock I just sold.  No more ego, no more illusions.

That brings me to point of this blog:  Are we in a bull market or not?  

I believe we might be.  Here is what makes me think this might be something more than a bear market rally:

1) Contrary indicators:  there are far too many "other shoe" bears peddling information that more than likely has already been priced in: the "other shoe" may or may not drop, no one really knows, but it won't be a surprise to anyone, except those who get their news from carrier pigeons.

One such bear is the afore-mentioned, Jim Rogers, whose prescient call in 2007, went unnoticed, but who is getting plenty of coverage now.  It is important to note that when you make market pronouncements so publicly, they are often recorded for history.  When a guy gets it right, the media celebrates him (after the fact), but it is equally noteworthy when he gets it wrong. 

Here are some comments by Jim Rogers in the January, 1988 edition of Barrons:

"Most stock markets around the world are going to go up dramatically...but no longer than six months, at which point, we are going to have a real bear market.  I am talking about a bear market that is going to wipe out most people in the financial community, most investors around the world.  And in fact there are many markets I would short, but which I will not be short, because I think they will probably close them down" 

It hard to get much more wrong than that.  The chart of the Dow, the S & P, the Nasdaq, show a stock market that virtually went straight up for a decade, with one recession in the early 1990's over the S&L scandal and war fear, and the normal pullbacks and corrections associated with a bull market.  If you sold everything, and went into gold, or hid in your underground bunker, you missed one of the greatest bull markets of all time.

2) Reluctant converts: A few noted bears who shorted the market all the way down, have turned bullish, after the huge run-up in stocks, and the remarkable ability of the most doubted rally in recent history's ability to hold up. Most of these converts talk about being bearish long-term, bullish short-term.

3) Fewer sellers:  Shelby Davis, the noted investor in insurance companies and financials, who took 50K and turned it into 900M, was early to the bull market that began in 1949, and carried through the entire decade of the 1950's.  The Dow, which took 20 years to clear the 1929 high, nearly tripled.  One comment he made really struck me:  in order to have a bull market, it is not necessary for the public at large to come back into the market and buy; it is only necessary for owners of stock to become reluctant to sell.  

This is important because as my good friend and stock-picker extraordinaire, Jim B., observed after the 20 day sell-off in February/March of this year:  "This market will have an easier time going up, now that all the fair-weather investors have been shaken out."

4) Shortage of shares/Surplus of Cash:  In December of 1988, a mere 11 months after Jim Rogers predicted financial Armageddon, the late Sir John Templeton, was cautiously optimistic as he noted that the average length of bear markets is 14 months, and that it was possible that the bear market that had begun on October 20th, 1987 was over, and that a new bull market had begun.  When asked how we would know a bull market had begun, his answer was simple:  "higher highs".  "When each fluctuation results in a higher high, historians of the stock market will have a hard time saying we were not in a bull market."  He further noted that he believed that if were were indeed in a bull market, then it was possible that this new bull market could carry much higher than the previous one since there was a shortage of shares due to all the mergers and leveraged buyouts.  (In the 1980's more than 1/6 of all stocks simply ceased to exist as a result of the merger mania dubbed by the pundits:  the "decade of greed")  And there was a correspondingly large surplus of cash that would eventually be chasing far fewer shares as interest rates were lowered, and the 13% CD became a thing of the past.

You could make a case today that there is a massive shortage of shares in the financial sector as well as construction, home-building, and industrials, where bankruptcies and takeovers have wiped out billions upon billions of shares.  The surplus of cash, estimated at 3.8 trillion in money market funds, and treasuries is well documented. When that cash will find a reason to begin chasing better returns, is anyone's guess.  All I know is that I want to be invested before that happens, and so I am a reluctant bull.

I harbor the same irrational fear of another cataclysmic sell-off that many investors now have.  I have my finger on the sell button constantly on the few down days.  Recently I sold off my holdings of Walter Investment Management one day after I bought them because the stock sold off mid-day.  That was irrational in the extreme because nothing material had changed in the company, a fact that caused me to buy them all back the following day a full point higher.  If Sear's Holdings is worth 80-100 per share book based on historic real estate prices rather than depression-era valuations, should I sell it at 49.00 because the outlook for retail went from bad to hopeful and back again in the space of a week, according to the talking heads on CNBC?   

One lesson I learned is that no one can predict the market in the short-term, but long-term, you have to go with the odds.  And since the average bull market is five years long, it doesn't pay to be bearish just because everyone else is.  One sure way to make money is to buy what no one else wants, and hold it until they fall back in love with it.   And invest in sectors that the crowd shuns, until they embrace them once the coast is clear.  Sir John Templeton was fond of saying, "If you want to have better performance that the crowd, you must do things differently than the crowd."

I can't say it any better. 

I don't know if we are in a bull market, but I am convinced that other than normal corrections and pullbacks, we won't see another panic like this for a very long time.  And so on every pull-back, I am buying my favorite investments:  Companies like WFC, LUK, SHLD, MET, GE, QSII, BRK-B, AFAM, WAC, USB, GBX, PBR, HNSN & REED.   (Disclosure:  I own positions in all the companies mentioned above.)

 

 

9 Comments – Post Your Own

#1) On May 16, 2009 at 10:24 PM, russiangambit (98.75) wrote:

Regardless of whether it is a start of bull market or not, where do you suppose the earnings for the companies you listed will come from?

PBR would benefit from the rise in oil.

AFAM might benefit from the againg population, but if people are poor and government has to pay for ederly care, what is then? Somehow I never accept the idea of for profit medicine. There is something wrong with a nursing home having over 20% earnings growth. Medical companies should be run like utilities, and they probably will be in not so near future because the US population can no longer afford for profit medicine.

WFC,USB - again, the best case scenario for them is utility-like existence.

That is the kind of thinking that I go through when I choose a stock to invest. If you can see where the earnings come from, then you'll have enough conviction to hold the stock through a sell-off.

Report this comment
#2) On May 16, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Varchild2008 (79.99) wrote:

CAP and TRADE will cause similar panic.   Other than that I agree...we won't see 2008-like panic anytime soon.

Report this comment
#3) On May 16, 2009 at 11:04 PM, tmd6966 (< 20) wrote:

I bought WFC at 8.30 per share on March 5th, and I plan to hold it until I am in my 80's.  (I wrote about making this trade and also buying BAC at 3.30 on March 9th in my March 15th blog entitled: "The Next Bull Market"  I have bought other lots at various prices and traded them, every time gaming the irrational fear, and making some ridiculous profits as buyers ran the stock back up to last fall's valuations.

If you look at the last real estate panic in the United States, WFC was left for dead by the smart money investors.  Warren Buffet bought a ton of it, and made incredible amounts of money for a simple reason:  for a year or more the earnings were impaired by huge reserves booked to offset estimated losses.  After the crisis passed, the earnings normalized as they always do (after all, people will still need loans for business reasons, personal reasons, and many people will refinance).  The spread is extraordinary, with the artificially steep yield curve, and the government is backing all the risk for the entire sector.  Combine that with the shortage of financial shares, and when the "big money" eventually feels it is "safe" to buy banks, you can make a ton of money. 

What's ironic is that when "everyone else" decides to buy a company like WFC, they will pay up for the same earnings that you are saying are in doubt.  Those who wouldn't pay 3 times earnings on March 5th, will gladly pay 15 or 20 times earnings a few years from now.  And those earnings will be higher, so you get the old "Davis Double Play" in one of the safest bank stocks you could ever own.

If WFC earns 2.50 this year, you can buy those earnings right now for 10x E; if they grow at a modest 10% clip for 5 years, which is likely with half their competitors now out of business or gobbled up by one of the few remaining strong banks, you now have 4.00 in earnings, giving you a 40 dollar stock at 10x E.  If investors give the company a higher multiple for strong, consistent growth, the stock could go much, much higher.  At 15x E, you have a 60 stock at 20x E, you have an 80 dollar stock.  And you can pick it up for 25 now, and more than likely for less if there is any sort of strong sell-off.

Several of the companies on my list are trading at a fraction of book value (GBX, LUK, SHLD, MET, WAC).  Those I am adding to on dips.  The rest are trades against short interest (AFAM), or expected improvements versus low expectations.

Report this comment
#4) On May 16, 2009 at 11:10 PM, russiangambit (98.75) wrote:

> If WFC earns 2.50 this year, you can buy those earnings right now for 10x E; if they grow at a modest 10% clip for 5 years, which is likely with half their competitors now out of business or gobbled up by one of the few remaining strong banks, you now have 4.00 in earnings, giving you a 40 dollar stock at 10x E.

But how much of that growth will be used to plug the write-offs hole? That is the question. If the write-offs grow faster than the earnings, which is a realy possibility next 2 years,  they are done.

Report this comment
#5) On May 16, 2009 at 11:16 PM, tmd6966 (< 20) wrote:

I think that is highly unlikely.  In my estimation, the greatest threat to the financial system was a deflation of confidence, not real value. The real estate bubble that the Fed inflated, deflated, and then the gov't caused a panic by wiping out the shareholders of some major financial institutions that were broadly owned.

Confidence will eventually return, and the economy will stage a recovery, and new jobs will be created, all by the private sector, and people who were not underwater or involved in the subprime stupidity will fight like hell to keep their homes, because they are worth something.

That is my take.. 

Report this comment
#6) On May 16, 2009 at 11:37 PM, stockszar (61.48) wrote:

Excellent report. And I am glad to hear I am not the only one who thinks the bottom has past. The world knew of the crisis and all companies adapted inmediately, cutting costs, becoming more efficient, adjusting their books, etc. So it's all uphill from this point. Here is an analogy, what do you do in the event of an earthquake? asuming your house is down to the ground or partially damaged. You start building it back, you will take extra meassures while building it and extra meassures to preserve your house in case of another earthquake. So I am a buyer, and I wish I could buy more.

I agree with WFC, this stock and all bank stocks had been beaten up worst than Tina Turner, and WFC being one of the strongest and even better after the aquisition, making a national bank. Plenty of room to grow and rake all the cash.

PBR not only the oil price will make it go up, but also the fact that PBR, or Brasil I should say, became sell suficient last year, all the new oil finds will be 100% sold internationally. And they keep on finding new oil in dip waters. They are also growing in refining oil and opening new gas stations worldwide. Is this a reason to buy? yes are there any reasons to sell? no, when did the price of oil go down and stayed down in history?

Buy, buy, buy.............................

 

Report this comment
#7) On May 17, 2009 at 2:11 AM, checklist34 (99.92) wrote:

the stock market isn't so complicated.  Read David Dreman's mid 90's book "beat the market by going against the grain" or whatever its called.

when fear sets in everybody panics, takes money out of funds, which causes a dip, which causes panic, which takes more money out of funds, which causes a dip, which causes more panic an dmore dip.

Catch 22 eventually becomes an upward spiral. 

Dreman said something quite like this:

"imagine you go into a casino one night and you notice a  green room to your right, and a red room to your left. 

the green room:  You walk into the green room and notice that there are very few players, and you grab a beer, hang out for a while, and notice that their piles of chips just keep getting bigger and bigger.  You notice that ech bet is fairly small, conservative.  You walk over to the casino floor manager and say "these guys are making money, waht gives?  whats the odds in this room?".  The manager says the odds in this room are 55/45 favoring the player.  Thankfully few people play or we'd be bankrupt."

You are thrilled, shocked, excited by this opportunity, so you head out of the casino intending to take your life savings, mortgage your house, sell your spare car, and go play the odds.  You can't believe this opportunity.

On your way out of the casino you notice again the red room, and you notice that a dull roar is coming through its doors.  You're curious, you wonder if things are even better in there, so you go in.  You see pepole dressed to the 9s, you see screaming and crying and yelling and hceering, drinks are flowing, everyting is amazing, the energy is incredible.  Huge bets are placed, beautiful women cheer, but...

You notice that the piles o fhcips in front of the players slwoly get smaller.  But you notice that occasionally a player makes a big hit, perhaps doubling his money in a bet.  You notice that the bets are huge. 

You walk over to a pit boss and say "wow, this is quite a room, but it looks like people are losing money".  The pit boss says "yes, the odds in this room favor the house 54/46, we're lucky so many people play here".

You roll your eyes and think "this is insane, people in the green room make money, the odds favor them, their chip piles are huge.  The red room loses money, the people ther are going broke"

And you mortgage your house, sell your car, liquidate your life savings, you set off for the green room.  you can retire, you can live easy the rest of your life, its over you won, you found the green room.

But hten, on you rway into the casino, a funny thing happens. 

YOU WALK INTO THE RED ROOM AND START PLAYING.

Report this comment
#8) On May 17, 2009 at 2:28 AM, checklist34 (99.92) wrote:

why did you walk into the red room?

Are you in the red room right now?

Dreman suggests that the red room is buying into what everybody is doing, he suggests that the red room is doing what others are doing, going with the flow, listening to common wisdom. 

He says the green room is going counter-trend.  Buying low P/E stocks, (or low anything stocks), working to increase your odds by avoiding stocks that arne't likely to be bk. 

He comments endlessly on the reasons people go red room. 

And he's beaten the market.  Like may sensible, statistics based investors, he came into grea tscrutiny (along with Buffet) in the late 90's in the tech bubble for "missing the boat".

How did that end again?  Oh yeah, he beat hte market and bubble chasers got slaughtered.

Folks, negative bubbles happen too.  And they are why the green room pays 55/45 player, losing the house money. 

But in negative bubbles, like this one, people go with the flow, do as ALL THE TOP PLAYERS ON CAPS SAY, and bet AGAINST the statistical odds. 

Right now red room players on caps are tops.  And I'm not at all diligent about playing CAPs, 1/2 of my picks minimum were rec'd higher than my $avg.  I rec'd ACAS at $1.60, my avg is $0.70.  I rec'd ASH at $12, my avg is $6.00.  I rec'd BZ at $2.20 my avg is about 50 cents. 

But betting against a market not up in almost 10 years, down 40% in a year, is red room as can be.  The odds do not favor you in the long term.

Buying stocks from nov 2008 through april 2009 is green room if you pick companies that 1) arne't in favor / deemed acceptable to buy at that time (maybe goog, amzn, wmt, and others have been deemed "safe" in 2009) and 2) are cheap by boring conventional measures. 

Shorting stocks at S&P 750 was popular.  But unless you were smart enough to dump at S&P 670 it hasn't been very successful eithe rof the times we got there.  thats red room.

Go against the grain, beat the odds.  Play the historical statistics and beat the odds.  among the historical statistics are:

1.  low multple, value stocks beat the market

2.  what goes down tends to come up.   in bear market rallies or new bull markets stocks that dropped the most and don't go BK are the biggest winnres.  AXL, PNX, CNO are already well over 10 baggers in 2 months, folks.  Just for not going broke yet.  Good luck finding a growth 10 bagger in the next 5  years.

3.  buying when people say not to tends to win.  this noted i am quite convinced we're in for a down turn.  If the market goes up monday i'm hedging, if it drops i'm buying.  slwoly buying.  Selling when people say things ar eperfect and getting better. 

"go against the grain to beat th emarket" - dreman

"i try to be greedy when others are fearful, fearful when others are greedy" - buffet

"play the odds, don't take risks" - checklist

4.  selling when multiples get too high.  holding a stock where biz is ok, and it has a p/e of 50?  good luck.  This doesn't apply of course to c yclicals where p/e's at a given market cap might range from 2 to 2000 over a 10 year period, etc.

5.  buying small cap stocks.  whats the % by which small caps beat big caps historically?  a billion %?  this is especially true coming out of bear markets.

statistics are friendly.  they help show truth.  they teach.  you can learn form them, benefit from them.  they are intrinsically incapable of lying, even if htey can' tpredict the future perfectly.

stats say that you shuld buy small caps with low multiples, high beta, good odds of survival coming out of a bear marke.t  I VERY CONSERVATIVELy did this AVERAGING IN, its not like I timed the bottom, or even close, and more than doubled my money coming out of the last dip. 

what the stats say you should paly.

don't bet against history.  the biggest mistake US investors have ever made is assuming this time is different.

play the odds, paly the stats, play the stats, play the odds.  don't bet with a big huge trend, don't listen to the press or the trend-riding clowsn on various blogs. 

play the odds.  sell when overpriced, buy when cheap, don't bet against history.  Green room, go there.

red room, don't go there. 

Report this comment
#9) On May 17, 2009 at 2:36 AM, checklist34 (99.92) wrote:

biotech speculation = red room.  anybody got stats showing that betting on the latest wonder drug beats the market?

even counting the 5000% hits, does it beat the market?  remember, sometimes in Vegas dropping a quarter yields 100,000 bucks, but hte odds still favor the house.

mega growth trend riding = red room.  CSCO in 2000 anyone?  MSFT in 1999/2000?  GM in the mid 60s?  housing/real estate in 2006?  REITs or Casinos in 2007?

against the grain beats the odds.  REITs in march 2009 anybody?  Insurance in marhc 2009 anybody? 

see?

stop gambling, start playing the odds.  accept that this means you will wind up with very few people saying you are doing the right thing.  accept that when everybody agrees with you, you won't likely be doing the right thing for long.

against the grain = beat the odds.

for all the bears tha tsay "hells ya, against the grain, the market is up a bit now, short it, go against the grain" remember, the market is still, historically, wildly in the toilet, and the odds over any amount of time (1-5 years) still wildly favor going long, not short.

i think we're getting a short term pullback, bu tlong term my money still bets WITH the odds.  i won't bet against it. 

Report this comment

Featured Broker Partners