Recruiting and new knowledge!

I had been having a crazy schedule because of recruiting, because I dropped my resume everywhere and got a lot of interviews. What I realized that never came across my mind before is that interviewers really have different agenda in recruiting; some are looking for smart and driven individuals who are passionate about the job/market while others are looking characteristics written on the back of their notebooks. But wouldn’t it make more sense for the recruiter/interviewer to share a matched proportion of a candidate’s bonus so their interests and their employers’ interests are aligned? I guess that’s why it makes sense to have headhunters. 

Now, I’ve got both banking and sales and trading offers so am more relaxed now, after a week’s frenzies. One thing I learned in my superday on last Friday was actually very interesting. I talked the director of prime services and risks in a bulge bracket bank. He used to have his own fund, macro net long, which made him considerably more interesting to talk to. I asked him as director of prime brokerage services how he hedges his exposures to different positions different funds under different circumstances, e.g. Egypt unrest. He answered that he basically had his team screening through all the hedge funds’ positions to see if they were exposed to Egypt, and if so, how concentrated their positions are and how big they are. Then reach out to them if the bank thinks they are in danger. Of course, the bank is not able the think; it’s him who makes the decision. Therefore, it’s still a matter of subjective judgment and decision making, just as in every other aspect of life. I also asked him when would he call margin or kick a fund out of his portfolio. His answer was very vague. He said it was a combination of how “big” the client is and “how are they operating.” I pushed for a more specific answer and he gave me a better one, saying that it’s very hard to quantify the credit of their clients but if they happen to use the liquidity they can access in prime brokerage by setting up a shell fund to support its subordinate PE business, then they might have crossed the line. That was very interesting to learn.

Mr. Hu and Mrs. Watanabe

I’d like to note on President Hu Jintao’s visit to Washington D.C. Of course, he was greeted with questions on human rights, which he remained silent about and was forced to say that a lot is “still remained to be done.” He was also criticized on trade policies, especially the currency manipulation that Americans believe to be one of the bottom-line forces that drive up our unemployment rate. It’s true that United States needs a surge of demand to lift it out of, completely out of, recession, but counting Chinese consumption of goods made in U.S. seems a little out of scope. This is because Chinese fiscal policy also astutely prevents consuming imported goods with high tax on import. Thus, Mr. Hu’s trip to U.S. only accomplished two things: first, China is patient and will be sitting calmly while dealing with all criticisms and questions; second, China can obtain “respect” from a powerful developed country, especially after spending skyrocketed advertising fees showing off its USD 6 trillion GDP in 2010 at Times Square. However, who knows if China is not stepping on the brake to slow down the heat of its “unhealthy” growth? It almost kind of sounds silly to me how growth is “unhealthy” only because it is too high that a government needs to “do something.” But “do something” is easy in China, because it has only one party and wouldn’t have to go through debates and criticisms to design and execute any policies, just as how its CPI was controlled through an effective decrease of vegetables’ prices.

Being vaguely tangible to what was broadcasted on TV yesterday, the stock market decided to go through a decline just for the sake of selling off a new high. There wasn’t any obvious reason why market should experience a dip. Some blamed it on GS’s below-estimate profit; some blamed it on Steve Job’s medical leave; some blamed it on BAML’s clichéd loss on its heavy position in mortgages; and some blamed it on what was discussed by Mr. Hu. But to me, it was just a selling off of new high of technical analysts. Of course, my personal portfolio suffered as I didn’t think there should be a selling off for no obvious reasons. I probably could have been in a better position if I were Mrs. Watanabe, a term that vividly describes Japanese day trading housewives.

April's talk on Chinese economy (All rights reserved)

It’s been two days in Shanghai. I visited Renmin Square, Nanjing Road, and the Bund Center in Shanghai and West Lake in Hang Zhou. So far, I have chatted with cab drivers, shopping center salespeople, and shoppers and gathered some really interesting facts.

1.       1. Real Estate:
Both cities’ real estates are booming. The housing prices in city centers are around 40,000 to 50,000 RMB per square meter, which is equivalent to 670 to 835 USD per square foot (40,000/6.65/9 to 7,500/6.65/9). That is, a 900 square foot co-op in any skyrocket apartment building is around 603,000 to 750,000 USD. Notice it is co-op, not condo or house. This sounds ridiculous to me because the median income is around 120,000 to 150,000 RMB, which is about 25,000 USD. That being said, a typical resident needs to work 28 years for an apartment (700,000/25,000). Housing prices half an hour away from the city centers are about 3/4^th as much, which does not make a huge difference. What is more disappointing is that most people who are purchasing houses are taking loan size of 50-70% at an interest rate higher than Chinese inflation rate of 5.9% as reported by Chinese government. This allows the 70% mortgage financed homeowners to be underwater if housing prices decline by less than 25% depending on their credit. Although the government has imposed 50% minimum for house financing last month, some house buyers are taking private loans from relatives and friends to pay the down payment. Therefore, the government’s action to slowdown economic growth might not be as effective as it seems.
2.       2. Level of consumer spending:
It comes as a shock to me how much more expensive the same items are in China than in U.S. and how many people are buying these items just because they are branded. For example, Zara was surprisingly popular in both cities. Jeans, long-sleeve sweatshirts, and sweaters made of cotton and polyesters are selling at 299 RMB or 45 USD, compared to similar items selling at around 25 to 35 USD in Boston and New York City.  Moreover, a pair of typical* Nine West boots is selling at around 2200 RMB or 340 USD; a typical Coach purse is selling at 4500 RMB or 670 USD; Lamcome lip gross at 350 RMB or 53 USD; a Vero Moda leather jacket is selling for 2300 RMB or 345 USD.
These prices partially reflect Chinese taxation on “imported goods” that all have prints “made in China,” and partially reflect the level of consumer spending. On the other hand, in Shanghai, every two out of ten girls have a pair of Ugg boots on, every one out of fifteen girls have a Louis Vuitton purse, and every seven out of ten girls have branded purses, shoes, or coats.
Louis Vuitton and Gucci salespeople claim that daily sales volumes are “very impressive.” Some stores claim that the brands they are carrying are U.S based brands, such as E-Land and Plory, which are unheard of in U.S, but the items are just as dear.
It’s apparent that Chinese shopping pattern is similar to that of South Korea, pursuing brands blindly just for the sake of competing with friends to see who has got the most popular item.
3.       3. Where is the wealth from?
A lot of shoppers are feeling wealthy because of the booming real estate which brought them immediately realized wealth when the real estate developers generously compensate old house owners for kicking them out of their old homes and building taller buildings at the same spots. Some shoppers are feeling wealthy because they are upstarts, who used to earn fixed salaries working as government officers for running state-owned businesses, and suddenly became wealthy when these businesses are privatized and they became the business owners by using the assets of the businesses to take loans and leverage buyout the businesses. Since the businesses are originally state-owned, a lot of them are monopolies or local monopolies. Therefore, the profitability and economics of scale is unquestionable. In other words, the business owners’ wealth all came so easily that they wouldn’t feel as hurt when the wealth fades away as they are buying Omega watches for their secretaries and secondary significant others.

*”Typical” means median.

Boarding Now!

I'm boarding now to go to San Francisco, transferring to another flight to go to Shanghai. International check-in took me a total of three hours from 4am to 7am, allowing me to finish four interviews of Jack Schwager's in the New Market Wizards. And now, I finally got a chance to sit down and write something before my flight leaves at 7:40am.

I have left a message in my phone telling my traveling schedule. Hopefully, that'll help people who are trying to reach me.

One more note before we get to market updates. MY ADVISOR IS VERY PLEASED WITH MY IDEAS IN MY STATISTICS RESEARCH!!! That made my day yesterday, but I had been smiling oddly since my meeting with him yesterday at noon, which was probably too much.

Now, quick recap on market update >>>
So Moody's is still signaling that it is considering cutting Portugal's rating, but the market appears to be tired of the European debt problems, so I don't see anything disastrous happening.
The ten-year yield is down but the market is up, which shows a mixed feeling toward the end of the year. We might see some side-way walks, but in the ten years before 2011, I'm net optimistic, more because of how crammed and crowded the department stores are both in New York City and Boston.

Just a side note, my portfolio has been doing well, with HIG, GS, and CSCO climbing up with the market.

Weird Weird Weird

Rising mortgage rates somehow is coupling with higher home sales nowadays, possibly as a result of declining home prices for the quarter ending in September. Seeing poor underwater homeowners, the sympathetic Freddie Mac again asks the government to forgive the debt. I can totally imagine Obama to be in headache, because on one hand, by lowering rates to allow refinance he has already pumped billions of dollars to U.S citizens, and on the other hand, this hole in which he's pumping money in just doesn't seem to have an end. I guess he finally realized it is endless so is currently switching his focus to job creation, which is definitely wiser. An ancient Chinese philosopher has once said, "fulfill the urgent needs; not save the poor." The wisdom lays in the fact that regardless how much you are giving to a street beggar, he won't stop begging because you gave him money, and by giving him money, you only make him want to beg more, which is an endless hole to fill in with your money.

Just out of curiosity, I ran an regression of GDP on housing, not adjusting for omitted variable bias or what not that you usually find in an Econometrics textbook from 1991 to 2009. I found that the beta is approximately 0.72, which scared the crap out of me. That is just saying that it is probably that 72% wealth is built in the housing properties in U.S. That's just too damn high.

Taxes, Treasuries, and the Equity Market

A couple things happened in the past two days.

Obama has agreed (not signed yet though) to the proposal that as a compromise between Republican and Democrat, we would leave the Bush Tax Cuts in place for EVERYONE and extending the payments of unemployment benefits.  In addition, it looks like the proposal puts the estate tax rate at 35% with $5 million exclusion, as well as a provision for a 2% reduction in social security taxes. So now, both parties are happy and content but it is apparent both are kicking the iron down the road for the other to solve budget deficit problem. Instead of keeping both parties achieving “success” in the deal, if both have agreed to step backward to lift the tax cuts and cease extending unemployment benefits, it might be a much better world later.

On the flip side, the 10-year Treasury smashed above 3% pushing high the 10-year mortgage rates, allowing the underwater home owners to scuba dive a little further. As we know, it is rather difficult for equity market to rally with the yields, so we have to see how the s&p reacts in the days to come.

The Silver

The video I'm sharing will communicate itself about the currency manipulation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gl47z2g2EvI&feature=player_embedded