Seeking Alpha

Joe Springer's  Instablog

Joe Springer
Send Message
It is very hard or impossible to time the broad market consistently — there are no famous investors that got rich by consistently knowing what the broad market would do next. This only makes sense, as there are just too many variables in the broad market. But there are many famous investors who... More
My company:
The Wall Street Exclusive
My blog:
The Wall Street Exclusive
View Joe Springer's Instablogs on:
  • A People's Victory

    Janet Yellen and the Federal Reserve have NOT invited the heads of Goldman Sachs (NYSE:GS), Morgan Stanley (NYSE:MS), Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) and other private banks to next month's annual central bankers meeting in Jackson Hole.

    This is a first for the Fed, and we think the officials are making an important statement about fairness in the markets.

    What we think happened is that under the guise of serious concern for financial stability, the private bankers got that language about small-caps published last week, and made a quick buck.

    We think that the backlash to last week (the pressure partly applied by the brave souls that signed the petition) was embarrassing for the Fed, and caused them to make a statement by cutting the bankers out of the loop.

    This is the right thing to do. These private banks act out of self-interest, like every other economic player, and should not have early information or special access to the decision making process.

    This is not the explicit statement that we were looking for, but we do think it is an important statement about fairness in the markets, and we applaud the bold move by Janet Yellen and the officials at the Federal Reserve.

    Jul 22 3:09 PM | Link | 8 Comments
  • Three Reasons The Federal Reserve Should Not Value Stock Sectors

    When Janet Yellen and the Federal Reserve proclaimed that:

    valuation metrics in some sectors do appear substantially stretched-particularly those for smaller firms in the social media and biotechnology industries

    they caused a great deal of unwarranted hardship for American small business.

    Biotechnology and social media are two of the most important industries for the welfare of people and the future of the economy. Small companies go public to get funding, employ people, and grow. By singling out these two important sectors of the economy the Federal Reserve made it more difficult for these businesses to succeed.

    This action by the Federal Reserve is inappropriate for three main reasons: Authority, Capability, and Credibility.

    1) Authority - The Federal Reserve Does Not Have the Legal Authority to Take This Kind of Action

    The Federal Reserve is legally bound to its Dual Mandate of full employment and price stability. Calling out these two sectors for their supposed over-valuation is not defensible as part of the Federal Reserve's Dual Mandate.

    Employment was directly hurt by, not helped by, this action. The Federal Reserve worked directly against its legal mandate of full employment.

    Was there such a desirable benefit for price stability that this action does in fact fall under the Dual Mandate? The case for that is absurd.

    Neither sector is even related to traditional pricing models. Social media is almost entirely free of charge. This is the definition of stable consumer pricing.

    Biotechnology end-products have some of the most complex pricing mechanisms of any economic good -- involving private insurers, social programs, competing therapies, intellectual property, and laws at all levels.

    The idea that making it harder for small social media and biotechnology companies to get funding is some sort of a proper way for the Federal Reserve to influence price stability under its Dual Mandate is ludicrous.

    The Federal Reserve does not have the legal authority to take the action that it took.

    2) Capability - The Federal Reserve Cannot Value Sectors Better Than the Market

    The Federal Reserve has no ability to value any sector of the stock market better than the market itself does. We can see this in three main ways:

    A) No Magic Formula or Crystal Ball: If the Federal Reserve did have some sort of special formula or valuation strategy to "rightly" value the market, it would only make sense to share it with the public, so there would be no bubbles. They have no such formula.

    On what would these "right" special insights be based? History? Social media has no history.

    Small biotechnology companies are so different from one to another that any broad model for the sector is bound to be fraught with deficiencies. That alone should have kept the Federal Reserve from dealing a blow to the entire sector, most certainly including tomorrow's life saving technologies.

    These sectors are going to be very interesting in the future. The Federal Reserve does not have any better formulas or strategies than the market, and they have no crystal ball to know what will happen with these technologies.

    B) The Market is Self-Correcting: When sectors are "substantially stretched" firms can make a lot of money shorting these stocks, playing the role of keeping them properly valued. If the valuations are where they are, maybe they belong there. It is important to recognize who the people these firms employ are..

    C) The Private Sector Gets the Brightest Minds: People are much more motivated by money than by country, and the best employees do not go to the government, they go to the private sector. The government employees at the Federal Reserve making sector valuation calls are paid far less than the people that they are trying to outsmart.

    There is also the question of experience, of which there can be no question. Janet Yellen has no work experience in the private sector outside of a classroom, let alone work experience valuing stocks. She is a curious choice to tell the private sector what they are missing in their stock sector valuation analysis.

    The Federal Reserve has no ability to value any sector of the stock market better than the market itself does.

    3) Credibility - The Federal Reserve Has an Agency Problem

    When Janet Yellen and the officials at the Federal Reserve act outside the purview of the Dual Mandate, they become prone to an agency problem:

    Here the difficulty lies in assuring that the firm, as agent, does not behave opportunistically toward these various other principals

    Starting July 7, eight days before her testimony, small social media and biotechnology sectors sold off hard (see the etfs SOCL and IBB), kept selling off, and really started tumbling once Janet Yellen's remarks were finally revealed to rest of the world.

    (click to enlarge)

    As the Chair of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Janet Yellen works with many people, each of whom has a staff of people, each with many important contacts. For practical purposes this means that a tip-off to friends of those involved is unavoidable 100% of the time.

    People close to Janet Yellen benefited by shorting the sectors she was about to censure, or by furnishing this information to others. Anytime the Chair provides such a lucrative opportunity like condemning small sectors of the market provides, and it's known by dozens of people weeks in advance, the same thing is fated to happen.

    The American people can anticipate the Chair already: my staff and I did nothing wrong "to best of my knowledge."

    The American people have no appetite for the "plausible deniability" that they already know surely awaits any inquiry into the obvious, assured tip-off.

    The Federal Reserve would only detract further from its flagging credibility if it tried to appear simultaneously credible and oblivious to this type of opportunistic behavior.


    Because of the lack of authority, capability, and credibility, Janet Yellen and the Federal Reserve should not try to substitute their stock sector valuations for the market's valuations.

    Now that they have done so it is important that they acknowledge the action was an error, and make a statement that further such action is inappropriate.

    You can sign the petition here.

    Disclosure: The author has no positions in any stocks mentioned, and no plans to initiate any positions within the next 72 hours. The author wrote this article themselves, and it expresses their own opinions. The author is not receiving compensation for it. The author has no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

    Jul 20 8:43 PM | Link | 12 Comments
  • A View To A Clueless...One Would Hope

    Today Janet Yellen and the Federal Reserve made it harder for American small business to raise money, most especially in two of the most important industries to the future of the economy and welfare of people: biotechnology and social media.

    This has nothing to do with the Fed mandate for full employment, it is certainly a detrimant. The other mandate of price stability? Hardly.

    What was the justification? No evidence was given. How could there be any? Social media has no historical record. The Fed is purely speculating.

    Did political allies benefit? Yes indeed we think they did, after "someone" got the tip-off in early July:

    (click to enlarge)

    So the Fed gives the devil to small American business. Anybody get a boost? Nestle (which owns Deer Park) is a $220 billion dollar Swiss firm:

    (click to enlarge)

    Boo. Hiss. Tsk. Tsk.

    Tags: fed, yellen
    Jul 15 5:27 PM | Link | 2 Comments
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers


More »

Latest Comments

Most Commented
  1. Fire Away (135 Comments)
  2. I Am You See (101 Comments)
  3. What Is Tonix Worth? (89 Comments)
  4. Hooked On Tonix (64 Comments)
  5. Seattle Super-Tonix (53 Comments)
Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.