Seeking Alpha

Tom Guttenberger

View as an RSS Feed
View Tom Guttenberger's Comments BY TICKER:
Latest  |  Highest rated
  • Baidu Is A Buy, Dude [View article]
    Agreed!
    Mar 15 11:47 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Baidu Is A Buy, Dude [View article]
    This is not a shot at the author.

    How clear has it become that SeekingAlpha top articles has just become a best title contest?
    Mar 15 11:29 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • February Nonfarm Payrolls: +236K vs. consensus +160K, 119K previous (revised from +157K). Unemployment rate 7.7% vs. consensus 7.9%, 7.9% previous. [View news story]
    Yes, it was a pretty good report. Not sure how most arrived at a 7.9% estimate having already seen this much initial claims data, but maybe I'm missing something.

    Feb's changes look smaller than last years, not sure what is so great about that. I think any of the private sector policy-fear weakness worries were probably ill-founded GOING INTO the report and more of the public slashing will be coming forward.

    Overall think that this report has been greeted with amazingly unanimous optimism in the press, and think the positive effects have already been priced into the market.
    Mar 9 12:00 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Unequivocally Strong North American Jobs Data [View article]
    You should look at initial and continued claims data, those are consistent with improvements, and I think more reliable than the headline numbers often times.
    Mar 8 12:53 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • China's trade surplus falls to $15.25B in February from $29.15B in January but beats expectations for a deficit of $7.75B. Exports +21.8% vs 25% and 10.1%. Imports -15.2% vs 28.8% and -8.8%. Data is distorted by the Chinese New Year, so analysts look at January and February combined, when exports rose 23.6% vs consensus of +17.6% and imports were +5% vs +10%. [View news story]
    There should not be any shortage of very creative explanations.
    Mar 8 12:49 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Unequivocally Strong North American Jobs Data [View article]
    Good explanation, thank you.
    Mar 8 10:02 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Unequivocally Strong North American Jobs Data [View article]
    Marc, I don't think there was a lot of concern over the fiscal tightenting on the market's behalf. Looking forward to March's numbers the concern is a given, future impact from the public sector job losses. I know the private sector in the US has been strong, but it must also reflect a bit on concessions in policy. Do you think so?
    Mar 8 09:39 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The big U.S. banks are considering defying the Fed and announcing capital return plans shortly after stress tests are released this afternoon, reports Bloomberg. The Fed wants the lenders to wait another week, but bank lawyers worry the plans will leak out. It's under discussion, JPM CFO Lake told an investor conference (transcript) Tuesday. XLF +0.6%[View news story]
    I can see some of your points, on some our views don't differ much, on others I disagree.

    The financial reform legislation was so vague that it, for all intents and purposes, didn't pass....

    I agree with your notion about "blanket" regulation, agree with freedoms, just disgusted by the gall of the banks that they would consider it. Good banks took TARP money because it was cheap money, and could understand their gripe to an extent. But they still work WITHIN monetary system that needs to be somehow centrally governed. After all you don't have JPMorgan Notes in your wallet.

    Tail risk is tail risk...unknown unknowns...I do think the tail has gotten shallower, but has it gotten shorter or disappered? I very much doubt it.

    Please PM me if interested in further discussion.
    Mar 7 04:36 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The big U.S. banks are considering defying the Fed and announcing capital return plans shortly after stress tests are released this afternoon, reports Bloomberg. The Fed wants the lenders to wait another week, but bank lawyers worry the plans will leak out. It's under discussion, JPM CFO Lake told an investor conference (transcript) Tuesday. XLF +0.6%[View news story]
    I am certainly enough a free market proponent, I think, but you must offer credence to the fact that SOME gov't regulations are necessary. And especially in the post-TARP era this seems well within the Federal Reserve's jurisdiction.

    To think that the subprime securitization blow up was a one-institution isolated event is way off in my opinion. Sure, maybe the number of banks absorbed or in need of money was limited, but there were many players culpable on the loan origination side. The MBS' or whatever bad collateral could be anyone's burden, and with the information asymmetries around these securities, the Fed's macro-level auditing is absolutely necessary. In fact, I doubt it is even stringent enough. Realize that I've tried to create a derivatives market around this belief, it is dormant.

    This is not to say that I am not bullish on banks or real estate at the current levels. Read my articles, I am. But I don't think capital disbursements should even be in the discussion until tail risk is completely off the table.
    Mar 7 03:01 PM | 1 Like Like |Link to Comment
  • At Yahoo, 6 Months And $1 Million Later, Marissa Mayer Needs To Get To The Point [View article]
    CEO pay is obviously a sticky issue. I think we can all agree to focus on the positives, and it seems like Ms. Mayer has done a fantastic job so far of making subtle tweaks improving monetization potential. I think the homepage is much more personalized, and YHOO genome sounds like an interesting project.
    Mar 7 01:46 PM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The big U.S. banks are considering defying the Fed and announcing capital return plans shortly after stress tests are released this afternoon, reports Bloomberg. The Fed wants the lenders to wait another week, but bank lawyers worry the plans will leak out. It's under discussion, JPM CFO Lake told an investor conference (transcript) Tuesday. XLF +0.6%[View news story]
    I appreciate the needs and concerns of shareholders, but if you are a long term investor you need to ask yourself if this is even a good idea?

    Yes, you are returned capital, and yes I think that banks HAVE DONE and ARE DOING much better executing their business in what has turned into a solid credit cycle. But this is the point -- sensitivity testing the turns and the need for additional capital buffers falls more into the Fed's area of expertise, and if their stress tests advise against it, I am inclined to believe them. I am confident that no one on the committee wants to face another crisis, and no one at the banks should either. Things are structurally no different than the time preceding the last crisis. Way too early to leverage their capital in this manner.

    These are just my two cents. I do tend to be a bit of a dividend hawk.
    Mar 7 01:36 PM | 3 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The big U.S. banks are considering defying the Fed and announcing capital return plans shortly after stress tests are released this afternoon, reports Bloomberg. The Fed wants the lenders to wait another week, but bank lawyers worry the plans will leak out. It's under discussion, JPM CFO Lake told an investor conference (transcript) Tuesday. XLF +0.6%[View news story]
    The banks need to stay solvent. The idea behind a stress test is to be sure that banks have adequate capital to survive unexpected shocks. Returning that capital to shareholders would not result in a feedback cycle that helps the banks' solvency risk. Really ridiculous how quickly the industry forgets about being bailed out.
    Mar 7 11:50 AM | 4 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • The big U.S. banks are considering defying the Fed and announcing capital return plans shortly after stress tests are released this afternoon, reports Bloomberg. The Fed wants the lenders to wait another week, but bank lawyers worry the plans will leak out. It's under discussion, JPM CFO Lake told an investor conference (transcript) Tuesday. XLF +0.6%[View news story]
    Increasing capital returns sounds like the worst idea ever. Believeable but sickening that bank stocks react well to this news.
    Mar 7 11:03 AM | 5 Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • Kabuki Theater: Analyzing Bernanke's Senate Testimony [View article]
    Maybe so, but consider this: By far, the heaviest weights on that distribution will be at the main maturity durations. So to represent ownership accross that spectrum will give a very misleading depiction about the average Fed ownership as a whole. My estimate holds that the Fed owns probably about 1/7th of the MBS market and is pacing purchases around 1/3 of the issuance, these figures being considerably lower for Treasury debt.
    Mar 7 10:54 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
  • All Men Are Mortal: Lessons From Chavez's Passing [View article]
    Definitely an interesting and timely piece. These emerging economies seem to always make good case studies for monetary policy on a larger or more experimental scale.

    I think that there is an underlying infrastructure factor that allows emerging market inflation to stay stably high like this. If the people in the economy have a strong enough preference to spend as opposed to save/invest the purchase level is going to reflect this preference. Especially with petrodollars coming in, and if this money is used in the decedent sense that you would expect a corrupt leader to apply this purchasing power to. If this trickle down continues in this way as each subsequent person lives equally autarikically, you end up with a system where no incremental ability to produce goods/technology/services has been created. In other words the demand for g/t/s has increased faster than the economy's ability to produce them.

    A difference comes in through the way M2 grows in many cases. In these EMs you see central banks try to manage the money supply with reserve requirments aimed at controlling the rate trade inflows can be transitioned into the consumer economy.

    Whereas here the central banker seems to regulate credit on credit from the capital account surplus, while relying on a matured economy and infrastructure to keep these businesses capable of servicing the customers' (insatiable, I may add) needs. A bad inflation problem only would occur if this ability is crippled. Which sort of brings me around to the whole oil/energy point. Do we really want to cripple these companies? By turning our noses to commodities like coal and solar wafers and pulling forward oil like crazy, we increase our chances of a bad outcome in both the short and long run!

    (Edit): And on a spuriously related note -- pretty big move from PBR on what I didn't think was much of a news item yesterday. One has to question whether the intrinsic value of an oil major is even capable of changing THAT much over the matter of a few years. As a volatility guy, seems like that could remain an interesting long spec trade.
    Mar 7 09:51 AM | Likes Like |Link to Comment
COMMENTS STATS
716 Comments
414 Likes