Buy on the Dip? or Is the Bear Still Hungry?
2001 has started off
as a most challenging year after the bursting of the largest financial
bubble in history during the latter months of 2000.
Want to buy on the dip? Well now we have one.
The Nasdaq Composite’s high was 5048.62 on March 10th and fell to
2470.52 for a drop of 51% by December 31st. It rose 15.7% in January
but gave virtually all of that back by closing at 2470.97 on February
9th. On February 20, 2001 the Nasdaq closed at 2318.35.
The three major stock indexes gave up all their 2001 gains by
February 9th despite the two Fed rate cuts in January and a strong
rally in the tech stocks.
The problem is whether today’s markets reflect 100%, 50% or 25% of
the dip.
Managing your own investments in these “Don’t try this at home!”
markets can be likened to trying to surgically remove your own
appendix.
WCBS radio informed us on February 5th that the average account
size at brokerage firms E-Trade and Ameritrade is now $20,000 versus
$40,000 a year ago and that business is very quiet.
CNBC has lost a significant portion of its audience and reported
that a year ago people thought they were watching “a Frat Party” when
stock trading was characterized as “legalized gambling” whereas now
they seem to be watching “a Tea Party.” Four percent of its staff is
being laid off.
January’s announced 142,208 job cuts was the highest monthly total
ever recorded according to Challenger, Gray & Christmas, Inc. (IHT
2/17). December’s number was 133,713.
And the announcements continue as Xerox plans to lay off 10,000,
Lucent 16,000, Daimler Chrysler 26,000, Nortel 10,000 and Goodyear
7,200 to name a few. GE has disagreed with speculation that 80,000
jobs will be lost with the finalization of its Honeywell merger.
On February 1st we learned the National Association of Purchasing
Manager’s Index (PMI) hit its lowest level since March 1991, virtually
ten years ago, when the U.S. was last in a recession. The indexes
gauging production and orders fell to their lowest points in almost
twenty years. At the same time Gross Domestic Product was at its
lowest level in five years. And consumer confidence in January fell at
its steepest rate since October 1990 – very important as consumer
spending accounts for two-thirds of the economy.
The U S economy grew at a rate of 1.4% in the fourth quarter of
2000 – the slowest rate in 5-1/2 years.
The Federal Reserve has lowered interest rates by a full
percentage point in less than a month. The target for the federal
funds rates was lowered by 50 basis points to 6% on January 3rd and by
another 50 basis points to 5-½ % on January 31st. This is the most
drastic adjustment the Fed has made in that short a time period since
Alan Greenspan became Chairman of the Federal Reserve in 1987.
It’s difficult to find “good news.” Unless one considers “good
news” to be the guesses by the hucksters that everything will be OK
beginning in the second half when everything will once again be
“onward and upward.”
We are reminded of Little Orphan Annie who years ago explained:
“It’s not that the snow’s so deep. It’s that my legs are so short!”
Since last March, the dot.coms, Internet related stocks, former
high-flying IPOs and a myriad of others have returned to earth from
their stratospheric highs resulting in losses amounting to Trillions
of dollars.
A number of “good” companies have also sold off very substantially
as investors and former investors were, as is always the case with a
bursting bubble, unwilling and/or unable to separate the wheat from
the chaff.
A review of our Commentaries, especially for the last year and a
half, will show numerous warnings about the problems inherent in
excessive speculation and the incomprehensible valuations being put on
New Economy Companies’ shares by many former investors. However, many
valuations, in our opinion, are still excessive despite their fall.
A year ago in our February 3, 2000 Commentary “Strong as Mary’s
Breath” we wrote: “We admit to having misjudged the prices people have
been and continue to be willing to pay for many tech, biotech and
internet stocks.”
Then we quoted the January 18th Wall Street Journal: “Euphoric
valuations are hardly the preserve of the Internet. Fifteen technology
stocks are today worth more than the entire market a decade ago. All
stocks put together are worth a record 172% of U.S. economic output,
more than double the level before the 1987 plunge.”
A short time later the unprecedented market run-up leading to the
greatest Financial Bubble of all time crested around mid March 2000.
We remember the old axiom “Don’t ever confuse genius with a Bull
market.”
Percentage gains and losses can be misleading. While a 20% change
either up or down on a 100 stock is 20 points, the consequences of
being up 20% or being down 20% are very different.
For example, I would be most pleased to have my favorite stock go
from 50 to 100 producing a 100% gain. I would be unhappy if it were
then to drop 50% from 100 back to 50. A gain of 100% from 50 would be
necessary to offset the 50% loss to get back to 100.
Another example: If my stock had dropped from 100 to 20, an 80%
loss, I would then need a 400% gain to offset the 80% loss to get back
to 100. If I were down 90%, I would need a gain of 900% to get even.
If it dropped 100%, I would be a true long-term investor.
The above examples illustrate the importance of attempting to
reduce or control losses. That is why we strongly emphasize the
objective of Preservation of Capital.
Inflation continues to be minimal; and, as mentioned, the Federal
Reserve Bank has begun to sharply lower interest rates reversing a
trend of several years. Although the Greenspan/Federal action will
take time to work through the system, it will become a positive for
the economy and the stock markets. The same will be true of a decrease
in income taxes if such legislation is enacted.
It is important to understand, as we close out the second month of
2001, that as a result of the violent shakeout of the high-flyers, the
stock markets have cooled to such an extent that now there are stocks
having a more favorable risk/reward ratio than there has been for a
long time.
Nevertheless, since we are not in the business of catching falling
knives and since it is foolish, if not impossible, to predict the
bottom, we will remain cautious until we see signs of economic
stabilization. All stocks do not go up at once and high quality bonds
having a short to medium maturity remain an attractive alternative.
We smell a Bear and hope it will be a cub. |
|
John, W. Hamilton
February 21, 2001
JWH: mm
jwh@hamiltonadvisors.com
|
Market value information (including
prices, accrued income, and currency exchange rates)
furnished in these reports may be based on data obtained
from one or more vendors. Although this information
comes from sources considered reliable, neither Hamilton
Advisors, Inc. nor any of its vendors makes any
representations or warranties, express or implied,
concerning the accuracy, completeness or timeliness of
such information. Republication without Hamilton
Advisors Inc. prior written consent is prohibited.
|
|