Category Archives: Risk

Did Europe Forget the Exit Clause?

Posted on by
2

It’s the early to mid ’90s. Reunification is getting set in Germany. Europe is slowly moving towards the Euro. Meanwhile, Yugoslavia disintegrates into smaller states.

My friend Jerome prepares his tuna salad to take to work. This pround Frenchman from Lyon then passes a remark that causes me to reflect. He says something to the tune of “Look at them, falling apart like this, while the rest of Europe comes closer.”

Europe, on the whole, is excited about the upcoming Euro. It adds to their identity on the world stage. The economic implications of the Euro look promising on paper. Europe goes ahead with the Euro soon after the turn of the millenium.

The “All for one, one for all” idea is an ideal. It’s utopic. Unfortunately, we live in the real world. The real human being is a selfish animal. In this real world, ideals have a tough time existing.

In its excitement, Europe probably forgets to add an exit clause. If there is an exit clause, we are not hearing about, and now would be the time to hear about it.

A decision taken while one is excited causes one to overlook the flip-side. This flip-side is emerging now. Certain nationals are more industrious and believe in paying their taxes. Others are lazy, corrupt and believe in cutting corners. Certain Euro nations are more economically astute and clued in. Others are perhaps not so intelligent or don’t want to be, and have made disastrous economic and financial choices.

The lack of an exit clause allows parasite nations (the truth is harsh) to stooge off the diligent ones till infinity, or till time does them apart.

Though it’s very late to say these words, one doesn’t see enough people saying them already. Not treating the financial disease at its root is causing it to spread. Unfortunately, everyone’s affected, at least for now. Whenever decoupling sets in, decoupled nations won’t be affected, but decoupling doesn’t seem to be happening anytime soon.

Would you like it if someone took your hard-earned cheese away? No, right? Well, nor do the Germans, or the French. Why would one expect them to like it, or pretend to keep lilking it?

Thus, why would one expect the Euro to remain intact till infinity?

One More Lollipop

Posted on by
Reply

And another lollipop emerges from the stables of Bernanke et al.

Though this particular lollipop is stimulus-flavoured too, it is packaged a bit differently, in a “low interest rate regime till mid 2013” manner. This old-wine-new-bottle packaging is making it taste good to the public. A psychological distortion of reality? Yes.

The last lure, i.e. the actual stimulus lollipop, had stopped having its usual effect of doing away with panic. If you have the same lollipop ten times in a row, it starts tasting stale.

How many lollipops can one possibly have up one’s sleeve? How is one able to fool the public for soooo long? Is the public totally low IQ?

What do ultra-low interest rates mean?

Well, they don’t encourage you to save. You’d rather put your money in more speculative ventures that promise to yield more. Low interest rates thus create liquidity in the market and suitable policies push this liquidity towards speculation and spending. This in turn fuels markets and consumerism. The US financial think-tank seems to think that this formula is going to get them out of the woods.

When markets are fueled well enough with liquidity, investment banks make eye-catching short-term trading profits. Their quarterly balance sheets look good, because the short-term trading profits hide the lack of fundamentals (savings) and the non-performing assets. The public is made to believe that their economy is doing well because their large banks have performed “well”.

Question is: Where are the fundamentals? Long-term growth without the cushion of savings??? No excess fat on one’s body to cushion one from shocks??? You know it, and I know it, and so does the black swan, whose population has reached a record high. This is the age of crises and shocks. If you’re not adequately cushioned, the next shock might get you. And the next quake will occur soon enough, because this era has defined itself as the age of shocks. That doesn’t need to be proven anymore.

Thing is, El Helicoptro Ben Bernanke isn’t bothered about savings presently. His primary concern is to revive a failed / dying economy. He’s willing to try anything to achieve this, however drastic the method might be. And he’s chosen to enhance consumerism. It’s a short-term remedy. Unfortunately, it makes the long-term picture even worse.

The flip side of consumer spending gone overboard dulls the mind into believing that one can spend as if there’s no tomorrow, even if one has to borrow after spending one’s own excess cash. This might fuel an economy over the short-term, but over the long-term, the burgeoning debt will make the system implode.

The US economy is not changing its course owing to fear that if it does, it might face the inevitable right away. It has chosen a path of postponing the inevitable. Over the course of time between now and looming debt-implosion, more and more of the world is getting entangled into this web, since globalization is in and decoupling is out. This is what pilots of the US economy are banking upon, that if the entire world might be devastated by a US debt implosion, the entire world might choose to live with the current financial hierarchy for the longest time rather than reject it right now.

If nothing else, what this one more lollipop does do, is that it buys a little more time to breathe. That’s it, nothing more.

El Helicoptro’s not able to Smell the Coffee

Posted on by
3

Helicopter Ben Bernanke just doesn’t get it, does he?

People have lost confidence in the Fed and its “stimulus”.

That’s why, when Benny Boy announced more stimulus a day after the “debt deal”, the Dow along with broader markets tanked even further.

The Dow only encompasses 30 stocks. Let’s look at the broader US market. For example, the Russell 2000 fell 9 % yesterday.

Now if that’s not a vote of no-confidence, then what is?

If we observe Bernanke’s dealings of yesterday, he heightened his stimulus announcement from one-week ago to “even more stimulus”. This is a death-trap.

How does El Helicoptro plan to finance his stimulus? By printing notes. Such free printing of notes leads to more and more currency in circulation, which ultimately leads to devaluation of the currency in question.

The devaluation process of anything financially connected to the US has been set in motion. Ben Bernanke is still not smelling the coffee.

Where does that leave you?

Ideally, one should have asked this question back in 2008, but if one didn’t, one will be forced to ask it now.

That’s what Mrs. Market does, it forces you to keep questioning your basics till you get her groove.

For the newbie investor who’s caught in the current fall and is taking his or her share of hits, well, the silver lining is the learning effect. He or she will buy with a margin of safety as an investor in the future, or will learn to respect a stop-loss as a trader. Mrs. Market will either force him or her to learn these basics, or will throw him or her out of her game forever.

What about more experienced players, who saw 2008, or perhaps older crises? If they are still taking a hit just now, well, they too need to get back to the basics. Mrs. Market does not discriminate between who is making the mistake. She’s universal in doling out her punishment to the non-performers, but also universal in doling out her reward to the diligent learners.

So what are these basics?

Mrs. Market 1.0.1 teaches two basic lessons.

Lesson numero 1 is for investors. They need to BUY WITH A MARGIN OF SAFETY. This allows them to sit tight during such a crisis, because they aren’t taking much of a hit.

Lesson numero 2 is for traders. They need to TAKE A STOP-LOSS once it is hit. With that they are out of the market and she can’t hurt them anymore.

That’s it. 2 lessons, people. No way around them. They need to be incorporated into one’s DNA before one can move on to second base with Mrs. Market.

This is what it sounds like, When Kings Whine

Posted on by
1

Back in the ’80s, musician genius Prince released the multi-generation blockbuster hit “When Doves Cry”. The song was unusual for its time, in that it gave R&B and rapping a pop twist. When something makes an impact, it sticks. The masses latch on.

The sound of whining coming out of Washington at S&P downgrading the US is something new. One’s not heard them whine before. It’s sounding unusual, but it’s provoking anger and dismay worldwide, and these feelings are catching on. S&P’s indication of further future downgrades are making the whining worse.

When Kings whine, their public loses faith in them. This new sound from Washington is dangerous for world markets. One likes to believe that one’s King has backbone. With that, one’s willing to die for one’s King. Which is something one is not willing to do for a spineless King. In that case, one would rather change one’s King.

If some resemblance of “spinefulness” doesn’t emerge from Washington very soon, the move from the Dollar to Gold is going to escalate even more.

The Towering Value of Decisive Action

Posted on by
Reply

Decisive action can’t just come outta nowhere.

There has to be a build-up to it, a kinda revving up of engines and stuff.

Point is, this category of action generates a lot of force, and is required to do away with situations that cause panic. As in not let a situation become panic-causing to you. As in the current situation. As in the Dow falling 512 points last night. Will they have a name for it, Black Thursday perhaps? I don’t think so. Because I don’t think we’re done just yet. Situation might get blacker.

Back in December 2007, there were those who were taking decisive action, i.e. they were booking profits. These were people who had been taught by the market to do so. Unfortunately, I didn’t belong to this category at that time. On the contrary, I was busy topping up my portfolio with more investments at the time.

Mayhem in the market should teach you for the next time. If it doesn’t, there’s something wrong with you.

By the fall of 2008, the new market players of the millenium had gone through with their first piece of decisive action – an oath to never be in a situation again that causes them to panic or to spend another sleepless night. The events of the first nine months of 2008 were more that enough to drive them to this.

An important part of peace in the market is hedging. Serious players chose Gold as their hedge, and started building up large positions in Gold. The world around them was screaming “how could they?” Gold was already touching a high back then. They possessed the spine to take this decisive action, because 2008 had taught them to hedge. That’s how they could.

Many worked their way towards zero US exposure. When the cracks in the Euro appeared in 2009-2010, they worked their way towards zero Europe exposure. People around them were screaming that the USD would continue forever as the world currency, and that Europe was under-valued and thus a screaming buy. All to no avail. These decisive players had started to mistrust Alan Greenspan from the moment he started urging his people to take loans against their homes and to put the borrowed money in the market. For me, the icing on the cake or the snapping moment was when Ben Bernanke had the cheek to announce more stimulus one day after the “debt deal”. That’s when I gave up on the US market. Very late, I admit. Yeah, yeah, I’m a real slow learner.

Then, serious new players started to buy on lows. And they got some big-time lows, especially the ones of October 2008 and March 2009. The world around them was screaming “how could they?” and that “we weren’t done yet” and that “economies would get bleaker”. They had the courage to buy. The market had taught them to.

And, finally, they started succumbing lesser and lesser to greed. They would finally book profits. They learnt to sit on cash for long periods of time. They learnt not to listen to tips. They learnt to have their own market outlook and to be self-reliant as far as the chalking of their own path was concerned. They decoupled themselves from their bankers and their market advisors. They got tech-savvy to a point when they could control their entire market operation from their laptops. Basically, they took control.

And, they slept peacefully last night.

US Treasury Bonds, Anyone?

Posted on by
Reply

Panic is something I felt during 2008.

It was actually good that I did, because now I know what it feels like.

Meaning that if a similar situation starts to arise again, now there are internal warning signals in my system.

Investors learn from mistakes. That’s the good thing about mistakes.

It will not take a Moody’s rating agency to tell even an average investor that US treasury bonds don’t deserve a AAA rating. Most investors I know have shunned any investment product with US treasury bond exposure since 2008.

Didn’t such ratings agencies give CDOs a AAA rating? Frankly, I don’t even feel like acknowledging the existence of ratings agencies. I’d much rather just use my common sense.

So, one’s learning curve freed one up from dangerous exposure after 2008. Are one’s investments still going to be unaffected from the ongoing and critical developments in the US?

Globalization is in. Decoupling seems to be out for the moment. If the US economy crumbles, investments worldwide are going to be affected for the worse. To lessen such shocks, God created hedges.

The best known hedge to mankind over the last 100 years has been Gold. After 2008, central banks worldwide started scrambling to find an alternative to the USD to hold their wealth in. Only Gold is standing their test. More and more central banks have started converting their USD holding to Gold.

Much as I don’t feel like acknowledging the existence of ratings agencies, unfortunately, I have to. If there’s a ratings downgrade in the US, Gold purchases by central banks are going to escalate. The astute investor will need to position him- or herself accordingly if he or she has not done so yet, starting right now.

As we bathe in the glory of Gold, let’s not forget that it is just a safe haven, a crisis-hedge. If economic stability returns to the world this or next decade (or whenever), Gold is going right back to where it came from.

Something else used to enjoy the safe-haven status till a few years ago. I think one calls them US treasury bonds.

Seasons change. If Gold is the flavour now, it’s possibly a temporary flavour.

Keep your eyes open, and keep using your common sense.

Wishing you safe investing.

Fine-Tuning the Need for Action : A Dialogue

Posted on by
Reply

It’s a multi-tasking world around us.

Things move.

We grow up with a need for action. Some with less need, some with more. Nevertheless, this need for action is here to stay.

And with this highly individualistic need for action, we enter the market.

So when does the conflict arise?

When one’s innate need for action is lesser or more than one’s market activity. Then, there’s imbalance, leading to market mistakes.

So how does one strike balance?

By fine-tuning one’s market activity with one’s need for action. These two need to be in sync for balance to exist.

And what kind of market mistakes is one looking at if imbalance exists?

Well, overtrading for one. Then there’s missed exits, early entries, missed stops, chart-related over-interpretation etc. to name a few.

And what was the key again, for striking this balance you are talking about?

Experience. There’s no substitute for experience. You’ve just got to go out there, put your money on the line, and trade. Ultimately, after some years, you strike balance.

And that’s it, is it?

Nope. Once you’ve struck balance, you need to maintain this balance.

That must be easy, right.

On the contrary, maintaining balance is one tough cookie. Here, everthing comes into play. Your family situation, relationship tensions, worldly problems…everything’s waiting to throw you off balance.

Man, sounds tough.

Naehhhh, you take it as it comes. One gets knocked off balance at intervals, and then one has to just find it back. It’s called Life.

And what’s your market activity like when you are off balance?

I’ll tell you a secret, listen up. When I’m off balance, I don’t trade.

Must be tough, going cold turkey, just like that?

Naehhh, it’s defintely better than the mistake-laden trading plays that one makes when off balance.

Oh, right.

Off with you, then, I’ve got work to do.

Ok, thanks and bye.

Bye.

Financial Academia and the Street – A Comprehensive Disconnect

Posted on by
Reply

1994 AD.

My friends in the Physics Department of the University of Konstanz, Germany, were busy trying to increase the number of holes on a silicon strip.

This was nanotech research in its advanced stage.

Nanotech saw successful implementation in the real world, though the explosion is yet to come. Nevertheless, the key words here are successful implementation.

Successful implementation on the street is only possible when a research model is practical.

Financial academia time and again delivers impractical models and is then surprised when they meet with failure on the street.

Let’s take the case of the Long Term Capital Management hedge fund. Nobel laureates ran it. They did not incorporate the possibility of a sovereign debt default in their model. So sure were they of themselves, that they went on to buy billions of dollars worth of derivatives, leveraging themselves to the hilt. Their total leverage in the end stood at 250:1. The sovereign debt default by the Russian government in 1998 triggered the LTCM fund to go belly up, and with it disappeared the life-savings of thousands of trusting investors. The ripple effects of this disaster almost knocked the world’s financial system off its platform. Talk about disconnect.

Currently, we are seeing the effects of another disconnect in action.

The Euro was conceived on the basis of hundreds of PhD theses and tons of post-doctoral research. What the researchers couldn’t possibly incorporate in their models were some basic human and emotional facts.

For starters, let’s try the Greeks. They like to retire early and work lesser than their Eurozone colleagues. Their bankers are gullible and not too street-smart, and have made some really bad bets.

Italians like to take short-cuts. They like to over-price and under-cut.

Germans like to go the whole hog. They are punctual and more environment-conscious. They do not like subsidizing those who don’t work for it.

French farmers want to sell their milk for its proper price. They and the majority of their nation dislikes subsidizing others who might not deserve subsidy.

One could go on. The list is endless.

How does one incorporate such realistic “human” stuff in mathematical models?

One can’t.

Mathematics doesn’t possess the language to reflect such human and emotional factors.

So what do these theses contain, upon which the Euro has been built. Other, disconnected stuff, no realistic, street-related emotional / human factors of value.

What we’re seeing is real disconnect in action. Financial academia is way out of its depth on the European street or for that matter on any other street. It should lay off from the street so that further disasters are prevented.

Let’s hope and pray that the Euro-chapter does not meet with a harmful end.

A Balancing Act Called Time

Posted on by
1

Why am I so obsessed with the phenomenon called time?

Because time is the long-term investor’s secret weapon.

I believe that a portfolio comes into its own after 7 years of being built drop by drop.

In this initial period, the portfolio tries to find balance. Losers get established, but so do winners.

Once it has been established that a scrip is a loser, the portolio tells you to get rid of it every time you look at the portfolio. It’s the red ink on the losing portion of the porfolio that speaks to you. And the passage of time can even give you the opportunity to sell a loser for a lucrative price.

Eventually, winners stand out. Their black ink on the winning side of the portfolio asks you to buy into them again. And once again your dear friend time gives you the opportunity to buy into a winner at a reasonable price.

Finally, the portfolio has excreted all losers and now consists of candidates you’d consider rebuying into at the right price during the passage of time.

This is called a balanced winning portfolio. It is balanced because some winners are cheaply priced in it and some are expensive. You currently want to be buying into the cheap winners.

The moment your criteria point out that a winner is turning into a loser, you look for the next exit opportunity for this scrip. And time will give you this, i.e. a chance to sell this scrip at a great price.

So, use your secret weapon. Everyone knows about time but almost nobody uses it like a weapon. That’s why it’s a secret weapon. Use it.

While building up your portfolio and navigating it through, take your time.

Is the Middle-person History?

Posted on by
Reply

Motivations…

are the propellors of life.

One can’t be an expert at everything. So one hires others to do stuff for one.

Of course one has to make it worth the other person’s while.

And the person you’ve hired needs to do the best possible job for you.

This used to be the pattern in the business of money. After the turn of the century, things started going haywire.

The middle-person in the business of money used to be a long-term wealth enhancer. His or her primary motivation was the creation and appreciation of your wealth.

Now, his or her focus is on the commissions generated by maximal short-term churning of your portfolio. This is dangerous for you.

I don’t know any wealth-manager who will share your loss with you. If earlier the loss would be felt only emotionally / morally by your wealth manager, even that is gone. So now, there’s nothing that’s stopping investment advice from becoming a function of the commission offered to the wealth manager. If a product offers more commission, that’s the product being recommended.

Where does that leave you?

Frankly, I feel that one is better off without an investment advisor. The web offers enough information on any and every investment product in existence. All you need to do is invest your time.

No time, you say? Who’s money is it? Yours, right? Then you need to jolly well take out the time. Only you can do justice to the proper, balanced and judicious investment of your funds.

So come on, snap out of any laziness. One hour a day to carve out a trajectory for your hard-earned money is all that’s required. If for nothing else, do it for your kids.

Are you a Pig?

Posted on by
Reply

Pigs get slaughtered.

Are you a pig?

Don’t know the answer?

See if you fit into what the market defines as a pig. Be honest to yourself.

A pig is a crowd-follower. He (for convenience purposes, I’m using “he”) doesn’t use his God-given brain. A pig generally enters into an investment in the late stages of a trend. What pushes him into entering is that nagging feeling of missing the bus.

The pig is most interested in knowing what others are doing, and gets swayed by flashy headlines. He doesn’t have a market outlook and blindly follows tips. He panics at the bottom and sells for maximum loss. The pig doesn’t exercise any holding power, even if he might possess it.

If you find yourself fitting into any of these patterns, please get a grip on the situation before it’s too late. Slow down. Start getting to know yourself. Do your own research. Slowly build a market-view. And then invest according to this newly found but solid perspective.

There are many ways to limit risk. The stop-loss and the systematic investment plan are two, for starters. Incorporate such risk-limiting factors into your trading style. Slowly build up an indestructable approach through trial and error.

Yes, make mistakes, because they are the only teachers in this game. Make mistakes with small amounts. A mistake should not be able to slaughter you, because now you are not a pig anymore.

Investing in the Times of Pseudo-Mathematics

Posted on by
Reply

First, there was Mathematics.

Slowly, Physics started expressing itself in the language of Mathematics with great success. Chemistry and Biology followed suit.

The subject of Economics was feeling left out. Its proponents wanted the world to start recognizing their line of study as a natural science. So they started expressing their research results in the language of Mathematics too.

Thousands of research papers later, it was pointed out that what mathematical Economics was describing was an ideal world without any anomalies factored in.

The high priests of Economics reacted by churning out a barrage of research papers which factored in all kinds of anomalies in an effort to describe the real world.

Where there’s money, there’s emotion. The average human being is emotionally coupled to money.

Either Economics didn’t bother to factor in the anomaly called emotion, or it couldn’t find the corresponding matrix in which it could fit human emotions like greed and fear.

And Economics started getting it wrong in the real world, big time. The Long-Term Capital Management Fund (run by Economics Nobel laureates as per their pansy and sedantry office-table cum computer-programmed understanding of finance) collapsed in 1998, with billions of investor dollars evaporating and the world’s financial system coming to a grinding halt but just about managing to keep its head above water. It was a close brush with comprehensive disaster.

The human being forgets.

The last leg of the surge in dotcoms in 1999 and the first quarter of 2000 did just that. It made people forget their investing follies.

What people did remember though was the high of the surge. Investors wanted that feeling again. They wanted to make a killing again. Greed never dies.

And Economics rose to the occasion. This time it was not only pseudo, but it had gotten dirty. Its proponents were not researchers anymore, they were investment bankers, who had hired researchers to develop investment products based on complex pseudo-mathematical models that would lure the public.

Enter CDOs.

For just a few percentage points more of interest payout, investors worldwide were willing to buy this toxic debt with no underlying and a shady payout source. People got fooled by the marketing, with ratings agencies joining the bandwagon of crookedness and giving a AAA rating to the poisonous products in question.

All along, the Fed (with the blessing of the White House) had been encouraging citizens to “tap their home equity”, i.e. to take loans against their homes and then to invest the funds in the market. (The Fed creates bubbles, that’s what its real job is). And the Fed, the White House, the leading investment banks, the ratings agencies and the toxic researchers were all joint at the hip, a very powerful conglomerate creating financial weather.

So, from 2003 to 2007, there was liquidity in the world’s financial system, and a lot of good money was invested in CDOs. Nobody really understood these products properly, except for the researchers who came up with them. Common sense would have said that something with no base or underlying will eventually collapse as the load on top increases. And there was no dearth of load, because the same investment banks that sold the CDOs to the public were busy shorting those very CDOs (!!!!!), with Goldman Sachs taking the lead. So a collapse is exactly what happened.

This time around, the now pseudo and very, very dirty economics (almost)finished off the world’s financial system as it stood. It was revived from death through frantic financial-mathematical jugglery and a non-stop note-printing-press, with the Fed looking desperately to bury the damage by creating the next bubble which would lure good money from new investors in other parts of the world which were less affected for whatever reason.

That’s where we stand now. Certain portions of the world’s finance system are still on the respirator. Portions are off it, and are trying to act as if nothing happened, shamelessly getting back to their old tricks again.

I get calls reguarly from Merrill Lynch, Credit Suisse, StanChart and other investment banks. The only reason why Goldman hasn’t called is probably because my networth is below their cold-call limit. Anyways, it doesn’t matter who let the dogs out. Point is, they are out. And they are trying to sell you swaps, structures, forwards, principal protected products, what-have-yous, you name it. I remain polite, but tell them in no uncertain terms to lay off.

As a thumb rule, I don’t invest in products I don’t understand.

As another thumb rule, I don’t even invest in products which I might eventually understand after making the required effort.

As the mother of all thumb rules, I only invest in products that I understand effortlessly.

That’s the learning I got in the 2000s, and I’m happy to share it with you.

Uncharted Territory : The Tough get Going

Posted on by
Reply

These are unprecedented times.

I mean, you’ve got 10-Sigma events occuring at a frequency that’s nobody’s business.

It’s time for the tough to get going.

All other investors are gonna get slaughtered.

So what makes one a tough investor, someone who can take hits and still remain standing?

Firstly, there’s holding power. If you don’t possess holding power, don’t enter the markets.

Then there’s patience. A rare commodity.

Discipline. Play to a strategy. Pick a strategy that’s in sync with your risk profile.

That brings us to the most important point. Know yourself. Know your risk profile. Your strengths and weaknesses. Invest accordingly. This one might take a while.

With time comes the power to pinpoint buying opportunities. Just as the exit strategy is crucial for the trader, the entry point is all-important for the investor.

Wins give confidence to double up on one’s position size.

Sight of one’s goal keeps one away from noise and a dangerous thing called tips.

An otherwise balanced life keeps one occupied elsewhere so that one’s not tempted to try other stunts in the market.

You can complete this list. It’s really not rocket-science.

It’s time for the tough to get going.

Learning to Sit

Posted on by
Reply

One of the first things a baby learns is to sit.

And sitting is probably the last thing that an investor learns. Some investors never learn to sit. Their long-term returns are disastrous.

Wanna make a killing? All right, first learn to sit.

To be able to sit, one needs to create proper conditions. One needs to take “jumpiness”, or volatility, out of the equation. This is done by buying with a margin of safety.

Having bought with a margin of safety, market blow-ups affect your bottom-line lesser. You can sit thru them.

And that’s all you need to do, to allow a multi-bagger to unfold.

Wish you lucrative investing!

Noose Just Tightened

Posted on by
Reply

Petrol’s up 5 bucks.

This is gonna pinch the public.

Are we now clear on the fact that a beast is on the loose? And the fact that this beast has been active to hyper-active since World War I ?

This beast is called inflation. The number 1 infectious disease that inflicts modern financial society.

We are going to have to live with inflation. Period.

What is required is long-term policy-making that will minimize the affliction. That’s not happening.

Modern financial policy seeks to avoid an existence where inflation becomes hyper. That would be when food on the table costs more that a cart-load of cash. See Argentina during its currency collapse, or Germany after the first World War.

Let’s assume that human-kind is not capable of making better policies, ones that minimize (let alone eradicate) the disease. Where does that leave us?

What do we do with our money, that’s being eaten away at 8 to 9%, year upon year?

Avenues like fixed deposits pay out lesser after tax than what inflation eats away. The 100 year return in Gold has been 1% per annum compunded, after tax. Only two investment avenues have yielded more after tax than what inflation has consumed over the very long term. These are 1). Property, and 2). Equity.

The writing on the wall becomes clear. To immunize one’s money against the disease, one needs to be invested in one or both these avenues over the long-term. Both avenues come with pitfalls, where one can lose much more than what inflation eats away.

So, one first learns how to deal with the pitfalls, and perhaps one can specialize in either of these avenues, since it is not easy to focus on both.

Then, after having learnt the ropes, one can slowly start salting one’s money away.

Anatomy of a Ponzi Scheme

Posted on by
Reply

Charles Ponzi came up with the brilliant idea of paying early investors dividends from the investment money put in by later investors.

It’s as simple as that, and it’s called a Ponzi scheme.

After the first few dividends, promoter disappears, having lured many investors into a fake scheme with no underlying business.

Latest famous example of a Ponzi schemer – Bernie Maddoff.

Or, if you’ve not seen Damages – Season III, that’s about a Ponzi scheme too.

So what lures the common investor into a Ponzi scheme?

Simple. It’s called greed.

What triggers the greed?

The Ponzi schemer concocts a scheme that promises a rather too lucrative return. This return does not look unrealistic, so the average investor’s alarm signals don’t go off. Nevertheless, it’s more than high enough to make the average investor’s mouth water.

And what’s normally promised is a quick return, mind you. The average investor buys smoothly into the idea of doubling his or her money fast.

Then there’s lots of advertisment. Billboards everywhere. The Ponzi schemer wants to hit the public with ads about the tremendous returns.

The sales-people who sell the scheme are glib-talkers. They are smart, wear expensive stuff, basically exuding sophistication. They want to rub it in that they’ve made it big in life.

A Ponzi scheme’s documentation generally cracks under close scrutiny. I mean, when something is being sold to you without any underlying business, all you have to do is your dose of due diligence. Just pick up the phone and start asking questions.

What works for the Ponzi schemer is human nature. The first investors (who get paid dividends from newbie investor money) start talking. Actually, they start bragging. The human being likes to show off. And, the human being hates missing the boat, even if the boatman is a disciple of Charles Ponzi.

The Dark Side of Private Equity

Posted on by
6

Greed is the investor’s nemesis.

I’ve been guilty of greed at times.

Luck has been on my side, and I’ve been saved from losing money. I’d like to tell you about it.

In my experiences with private equity over the last four years, the one thing that stood out was the pitch of each scheme proposed. The average pitch just sucked one in by describing a world that would appear utopic to somebody in a balanced frame of mind. When greed sets in, balance and common sense go out the window. One gets taken in by the pitch, and without doing any due diligence, one is willing to bet the farm.

The private equity teams of today have a tool up their sleeve that creates pressure on the investor, and leaves little time for due diligence. It’s called the time-window. Most schemes are proposed to the investor with a very short time-window. Either the investor is in within the window, or he or she can sit out. Lesson learnt: if one’s due diligence is taking longer than the time-window, then the scheme can go out the window rather than putting one’s hard-earned money on the line.

One of the worst starts a newbie investor can make is a good one. This happened to me as a newbie private equity investor. I got involved with the Milestone group in the middle of the financial crisis, and I invested in their REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts). These people were honest, and the investments have yielded steady quarterly dividends since, apart from the property appreciation. I started thinking private equity was the holy grail, and that all forthcoming institutions and schemes would be like Milestone.

Big mistake. When Edelweiss knocked on my door with an 8 year lock-in real-estate scheme, I was lapping it up. One thing kept going around in my mind – the 8 year cycle they were trying to make me believe in. Wasn’t convincing, but I wanted the profits they were promising. Before signing on, it occured to me to do at least some due diligence. I insisted on a conference call with the management. During the concall, I became aware of one wrongful disclosure. The pitch had spoken of a large sum of money from overseas, already invested in the scheme. In the concall, it became apparent that these funds were tentative and had not arrived yet.

A wrongful disclosure is a big alarm bell for me. I have programmed myself in such a way that when I come across wrongful disclosure during due diligence, I axe the investment. Luckily, the mind was not totally taken in, and I stuck to this rule.

Then came Unitech. Second generation real-estate magnate. Big money. Big leverage. In a joint venture with CIG, Unitech was redeveloping the slums of Mumbai, we were told in the pitch. Each slum-dweller would be relocated with ample compensation, we were told. The scheme had a multi-page disclaimer protecting the promoters against anything and everything. Alone that should have been an alarm bell. Of course I wasn’t thinking straight when I signed the documents.

In the next few months this scheme got a few investors interested, but its corpus wasn’t enough for the first leg of investments planned. Then, Adarsh exploded. I’m talking about the Adarsh real-estate scam. CIG / Unitech could not find a single new investor for their scheme. Everyone was scared of real-estate. Then there was another explosion: the 2G scam. Sanjay Chandra, CEO of Unitech, was one of the prime accused. What would happen to my money? Was it gone?

I got together with my bankers, and for more than a month, we steam-rolled the CIG / Unitech office in Delhi with emails and phone-calls, asking for the money to be returned with interest, since the scheme had not gotten off the ground. Luck was on our side, and after a thorough documentation process from their end, I received my entire amount with interest, one day before Sanjay Chandra was sent to jail.

Moral of the story: double your due diligence when you feel greed setting in. Don’t get taken in by fancy pitches. Don’t get pressurized into time-windows. Tackle the dark-side of private equity with a clear mind and full focus.

Just why is Embracing Risk so difficult?

Posted on by
1

Sir Issac Newton : mathematics and physics genius.

Let’s cast a glance at his market record.

Bought 20,000 Pounds worth of shares in the South Sea Co. around the year 1720, when the scrip was at its peak. Company went bust.

After having bought into this company at a ridiculous valuation, Sir Issac chose to sit on his investment rather than embrace a small loss in the first leg of the decline. The loss became bigger and bigger, till all was lost.

In our society today, parents push their kids to emulate Newton as far as brain-power goes. Newton has been a classic winner in the eyes of society. Kids are taught to win from the beginning. Losing is taboo.

When a straight A candidate enters the market, he or she gets a rude shock. Here is a world where losing is bread and butter. The straight A candidate is likely to get hammered.

A winner in the markets knows how to lose. He or she loses many times. But loses small. Then come the wins. They are not booked small. They are allowed to run.

This concept goes against our basic programming. When we show a small profit, we want to book it and run. It is an ingrained reflex.

When we are losing, we wait to catch up and start winning instead of embracing the small loss and moving on. Also a natural reflex.

Thus, embracing risk is a very difficult thing to learn.

If one can’t do it after many losses, one should leave the markets alone.

The Willingness to Embrace Risk

Posted on by
2

Any given market-play can only prove successful if one particular state of mind exists.

I’m talking about one’s willingness to embrace risk.

I mean, one can define risk all one wants, and one can understand it to the nth level.

But is one willing to embrace it?

The answer to this question is the singular deciding factor between a losing market player and a winning market player.

And what does embracing market risk mean?

Setting a stop is a physical act. One can do it mindlessly, without the actual willingness to accept a loss when it occurs.

Embracing risk means the attunement of every cell in the body towards accepting a loss when it occurs.

Accepting the loss and then moving on to the next market-play.
No psychological entanglements, no what-if scenarios, no why’s, no energy drainage due to mourning. Just sheer acceptance of loss. Period.

That’s the state of mind required.

Then, over time, as the sample-size grows, one starts winning.

That’s because one only plays the market with an edge.

The Meaning of Risk

Posted on by
2

Market play revolves around one central factor.

It’s called risk.

Whether we want to deal with risk or not is up to us.

If we do not want to deal with risk, we should not participate in any market. Period. Let inflation eat our money away in the bank.

Don’t like that option?

Then deal with risk.

In my opinion, there are two ways of understanding risk.

One way is practical, and simple to understand and implement. I like this particular way.

The other way is complicated and mathematical. This method utilizes software to perform mathematical operations using calculus, and expresses risk in terms of greek alphabets. The software spits out an abstract expression of risk, which is then implemented in the trading strategy. I don’t like this method. It’s just a personal choice.

So let me just talk about the practical method of understanding risk.

For me, risk is the money that one can potentially lose in a trade at any given point of time, expressed in percentage terms of one’s total portfolio value.  Period.

Once the underlying risk has been clearly defined and understood, the management of this risk is implemented through a stop-loss which is outlined after considering total portfolio-size and after eye-balling relevant chart-patterns at hand.

This strategy makes risk something tangible, something one can deal with, in Rupee or Dollar terms. It makes market-play a matter of addition and subtraction. It’s practical, simple to understand and easy to implement.

Then, this understanding of risk needs to be coupled with a market-edge to constitute a complete market strategy.

Same story. An edge can be simple. Or complicated. Choice is yours.