You’re Wrong — Here’s Why…

You’re Wrong — Here’s Why…

EDITOR’S NOTE: What if everything you thought you knew about markets is wrong? Unfortunately, that’s the case with most people who trust mainstream economists and financial media ‘commenters-for-hire’, according to Phil Anderson.

You’ll see exactly why he holds this view in his Grand Cycle video tutorial tomorrow. We’re making it available — for free — to any Markets & Money reader who clicks on it. But only for a limited time.

In 2007, right after the implosion of UK bank Northern Rock, Phil Anderson gave the following warning on his website…

The collapse of the bank here in the UK is a really big deal. Do not underestimate the probable implications. Repercussions will go worldwide next year.

 

Plan for the credit cycle to worsen. This has not hit Mr. and Mrs. Joe Average yet about the impending affects. Why?

 


Because they have no understanding of historical cycles…

Anderson wrote that right after Northern Rock became the victim of the first run on a UK bank in over a century.

Looking back, you can see Northern Rock’s collapse as one of the first signs of a global credit crisis…one that nearly brought down the entire financial system. But it was apparent to hardly anyone at the time.

Phil has a proven track record for seemingly knowing what’s about to happen next. You’ll see how you can integrate this track record in your own investing decisions tomorrow. Below, Terence Duffy, from Phil’s Cycles, Trends and Forecasts team, expands on the monetary value of looking back to find the future…

Looking Back to Find the Future
By Terence Duffy

All markets are connected. A major move in one area of the market has an effect on other areas of the market.

When commodity prices fall, the Aussie dollar usually drops in value.

Airline stocks benefit when fuel costs are lower. So it pays for investors in this sector to watch the price of crude oil.

But most investors make a common mistake.

They assume that global financial markets are based on the stock market.

They’re not.

Global financial markets are based on the real estate market.

Think about it. The world’s financial and banking system is based on lending money backed by the security of real estate.

When you apply for a loan, here’s one of the first questions they ask: ‘Do you own your own home?’

If you do, or at least if you own a home with a mortgage, the bank will take it further.

If you don’t, chances are your loan application will not be approved.

It’s the same around the world. Banks are far more willing to lend money to people and companies who can put up real estate as security.

Sure, there’s a connection between economic growth and company earnings. And companies who grow their earnings usually see rising stock prices.

But there’s a disconnect in the perception of global financial markets. It’s the reason why most investors don’t see the difference between a temporary correction and a major crisis.

It was a land crisis first and foremost that brought on the Global Financial Crisis.

The problem hit the financial system later. That’s why we watch the US real estate market for signs of trouble.

Phil Anderson detailed the history of US real estate crises in his book, The Secret Life of Real Estate. You can get it on Amazon.

The book details the US real estate market all the way back to 1800, when the US government first began to sell land to the public.

There is a recurring theme: Land prices rise and then collapse in regular cycles. The peak of each cycle is accompanied by excessive lending, usually via some new form of finance.

In 2004, Phil unveiled the history of US real estate cycles to a group of likeminded individuals. He told us to watch for excessive lending into 2006 and 2007. And that a collapse would follow into 2010.

Importantly, he also said that markets would boom thereafter.

It’s important to understand history. Looking back at history will increase your awareness about themes when they repeat in the future.

Let’s look back to the 1970s.

This is when Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) became the vehicle for excessive speculation.

REITs raised huge amounts of capital and put it into speculative real estate projects. When the bubble burst, here is what happened to the stock market:


Source: Optuma
[Click to enlarge]

The Dow Jones Industrials Average went from 1067 to 570 points in just under two years — a drop of 46.5%.

There were major bank failures. The authorities then isolated the problem with REITs and bailed out other banks.

The markets recovered, and a new real estate cycle was under way.

The next peak was in the late 1980s.

This time, excessive lending in the US came from the Savings and Loans Associations (S&Ls).

In 1982, US President Ronald Reagan changed the rules for S&Ls when he signed the Garn-St Germain Depository Institutions Act.

Interest rate restrictions were removed. S&Ls were permitted to make commercial loans. And limits on loan-to-value ratios were swiped, allowing risky loans to be advanced with federally-insured deposits.

It was a free-for-all. Within three years, S&L assets increased by 56%. Some of the smaller banks tripled in size.

The crisis came in 1989 when land prices started to fall. This led to the biggest banking crisis since 1929.

By 1995, half of the nation’s S&Ls had failed.

President George HW Bush unveiled a bailout plan to close failed banks and stop further losses. Markets quickly recovered, and yet another cycle was under way.

It was worse in Australia, but we’ll save the Australian story for another day.

We move on to 2004 now. Phil tells us to watch out for a new form of excessive lending into 2006 and 2007. This is the timeframe for the next peak in real estate values.

Sure enough, along came stories about mortgage-backed securities (MBSs) and collateralised debt obligations (CDOs).

It might have started like this…

A couple of investment bankers chat about starting a new investment product.

They reckon fat fees can be earned if they bundle up some mortgages into a bond that can be sold to institutions and the public.

Investors earn higher interest rates backed by the solid security of a mortgage.

Once the ball is rolling, other bankers, meanwhile, are worried about the risk of lending money for real estate purchases. Property prices were rocketing higher and higher.

They look at the new mortgage bond products.

The risk of lending can be removed. They can bundle risky mortgages into a bond and offload the risk on to someone else.

The race was on for these bankers to make more and more risky loans to people who would never be able to repay.

‘Hey, it’s a mortgage! We’ll get the agencies to rate it AAA and sell the risk to someone else!’

All of a sudden, it was possible to lend $1 million to a maid who would never be able to keep up with her repayments.

This continued until it was time for the cycle to kick in. Phil Anderson had given us the timing, and we watched as it unravelled.

The cause of the GFC was a downturn in property prices. As real estate prices fell, the security behind the mortgages put bank loans under water.

The value of property was no longer enough to cover risky loans, and a full-blown banking crisis was on.

As usual, the government stepped in with a rescue plan. This time, it was bigger than anything done previously.

And again, as usual, Phil was right. The market recovered in line with the expected cycle, and prices began to rise.

If you want to know when the next cycle will likely peak, keep an eye on your inbox tomorrow for a new video report that lifts the lid on Australia’s property market.

Best wishes,

Terence Duffy,
For Markets & Money

Leave a Reply

Be the First to Comment!

Notify of
avatar
wpDiscuz
Letters will be edited for clarity, punctuation, spelling and length. Abusive or off-topic comments will not be posted. We will not post all comments.
If you would prefer to email the editor, you can do so by sending an email to letters@marketsandmoney.com.au