Author: Chris Mayer

  • Insights about China and Nicaragua

    In a recent edition of The Daily Reckoning, Bill Bonner observed, “The world turned against them at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. But if the world turns long enough, it comes back to where it began.” He was writing about India. But he could have been writing about China…or Nicaragua…or any one of a number of emerging markets.

    In the next 1,618 words, I’ll share few insights about both China and Nicaragua. These insights share no particular connection to one another, other than the observation that economies do not stand still. The “emerging markets” of one generation are the “developed markets” of the next generation, and vice versa.

    Change is the one of the great constants in investing. Opportunity makes its nest like a tramp pigeon, never in the same place for very long. There is always something new happening. Asked about his worldview, Mark Mobius, the famous emerging markets investor, once replied: “Things change… You know, that’s it in a nutshell.” And in this swirl of change lies some big chances at profits.

    For example, last year China passed the US as the world’s largest market for automobiles. First time ever that’s happened. There were 13.5 million vehicles sold in China last year – a 40% increase. There are now over 40 million vehicles in China. According to the China Economic Review, over 2,000 cars roll onto the road every day in Beijing alone.

    China’s steps seem to mirror what happened in the US in the 1950s. China wants to use roads to knit the country together and open up trade between its distant provinces and cities. To that end, the Chinese are laying highways like nobody’s business. By the end of 2008, China had an estimated 60,000 km of highway. The US has 75,000 km. Over the next few years, China plans to have 85,000 km of roads.

    This is having some amazing effects. For instance, China recently built a highway from Lhasa, Tibet, which runs all the way to the Nepali border. Along this road is the city of Shigatse, a formerly sleepy town where tourists may stop to gaze at ancient monasteries on their way to Mount Everest. But today, it is also a place where people get rich running freight services along the 515-mile highway.

    An Economist correspondent traveling this way recently wrote:

    In the past few years, hundreds of millions of dollars have been spent improving the road. This has included covering its gravel sections with asphalt, which has greatly facilitated cross-border trade. On the Lhasa-Shigatse section, which winds along a valley lined by sand dunes and spectacular peaks, Han Chinese from the interior have opened little Sichuanese restaurants catering to the lorry drivers.

    The easy mixing of peoples and the freedom to pursue their own ends leads people to trade. Business expands. The quality of life rises. The roads are doing their work. The cars and trucks are coming. Where are the opportunities?

    The first thing most people think of is the automakers. GM, for all its struggles, is having no trouble selling cars in China. Sales were up 67% in 2009, to a record 1.83 million units. Other carmakers are having similar success. The problem here is it doesn’t make much sense to buy, say, GM, because you like its car business in China. There is too much else going on there.

    I’m more interested in investment ideas that are a step removed from actually building the cars. All those cars will eat up a lot of metals of all kinds, for example. They will also burn a lot of fuel.

    Dig deeper and you’ll find China loves methanol as an alternative fuel to blend with gasoline to lower emissions. China blends more than a billion gallons of methanol in gasoline annually. And its appetite for methanol is growing more than 16% a year. Methanol, made from coal or natural gas, is China’s ethanol. Such thinking led us to our methanol play, Methanex (NASDAQ:MEOH).

    I recommended this stock one year ago to the subscribers of Capital & Crisis, when US methanol prices hit a temporary low of $200 a ton. Today, the price is about $350 a ton. Not surprisingly, therefore, the MEOH stock price has more than doubled during the last year.

    But the stock is still relatively cheap. At current methanol prices, Methanex could generate over $800 million in EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization). The total enterprise value – or the theoretical price to buy the whole company on the market – is only $2.9 billion. So it trades for only 3.6 times this potential EBITDA. That’s pretty cheap.

    Another way to look at it is to think about replacement costs – or what it would cost you to build Methanex from scratch. Methanex trades for just under $400/tonne of methanol capacity. That’s less than replacement cost of about $700/tonne. There is still a lot of upside here.

    Shifting to another continent, and another type of observation entirely, change is also unfolding rapidly in Nicaragua.

    Nicaragua has always been a place of intrigue, mostly because of geography. Before the Panama Canal, this was the place where people thought of building a canal. As a result, American involvement in Nicaragua goes way back. Militarily, the first Marines landed here in 1912 and occupied it until 1933. And the Somoza regime, a dictatorship created and supported by the US, ran the country until the Sandinistas took over in 1979. (If you are interested in learning more, I encourage you to read Nicaragua: Living in the Shadow of the Eagle by Thomas Walker.)

    As a result of the Sandinista era, most Americans probably have a poor opinion of Nicaragua. But it is a beautiful country with its volcanoes, lakes and a lush tropical climate. The people are friendly, and Nicaragua is safe to travel through. The food is great and so are the beaches. It’s also a young country with more than half of the population under 25 years old. (Nicaragua also makes one of the world’s best rums, Flor de Caña – “flower of the [sugar] cane.” I enjoyed it neat and in the national drink, el macua, made with guava juice.)

    I recently visited Nicaragua and saw a bit of the country – Leon, Managua and Granada – before settling in at Rancho Santana. The latter is a development project on a spectacular 3,000-acre property on the Pacific Coast near Rivas. Stretches of it remind me of Big Sur with its dramatic coastline.

    The sad thing is that Nicaragua ought to be a rich country. Nicaragua was once a prosperous place of some renown. In the 19th century, for example, Granada was the most prominent city in Central America, a rich trading city holding down a key spot in global commerce. But the country’s economic trajectory took a turn for the worse during the 20th century.

    Nevertheless, the country’s rich natural resources remain. Nicaragua has lots of good land for growing things. The soil supports a wide variety of crops and livestock. Coffee in the north. Bananas, papayas, mangoes, sugar cane and more grow everywhere else. Nicaragua is also the largest country in Central America and among the least densely populated.

    Nicaragua has another special resource: It is among the most water-rich countries in the world. (I’ve been making my way through Steven Solomon’s new book Water, which is a fat tome on the history of water from ancient times to the present day). In a world where water scarcity is an issue, Latin America stands out for its water wealth. It has 28% of the world’s renewable water and only 6% of its population. Solomon writes that the “super Water-Have countries such as Brazil, Russia, Canada, Panama and Nicaragua [have] far more water than their populations can ever use.”

    Lake Nicaragua, one of the largest lakes in the world, is the future water supply of Central America. There are many rivers and lakes, which make useful internal waterways. And Nicaragua has access to both the Pacific and Atlantic oceans. Nicaraguan waters are also great for fishing.

    Nicaragua holds great potential for wind, geothermal – from volcanoes all along the western half of the country – and hydroelectric power. In fact, Rancho Santana is trying to become self-sufficient in energy. There are ridges there where the wind blows constantly. A wind feasibility study done there lately scored as high as it could. The conditions are ideal. Finally, Nicaragua has great timber resources, as well as mineral resources such as silver and gold.

    Present-day Nicaragua also illustrates one of the global trends we’ve been examining during the last few months: the “penthouse gypsy” trend. This term refers to people with money who go where they (and their money) are treated best, wherever in the world that may be. Increasingly, they are no longer in the US or Europe. It may be hard to believe, but there are plenty of penthouse gypsies down in Rancho Santana.

    Why not? They are able to diversify out of the US, where tax rates are surely going much higher. They get cheap, stunning real estate. Property taxes are hardly anything. You can live very well down here on not much money. I have a good friend who moved to Nicaragua five years ago for this reason.

    Most Americans worry about confiscation of property. But that risk seems remote after talking to people here. Tourism is the No. 1 cash cow of what is still a poor country. Even Ortega doesn’t want to do anything to upset that cash flow. (He owns several hotels.)

    As far as enforcement of contracts, the IMF and World Bank rank Nicaragua third among all Latin American and Caribbean countries. Foreign direct investment in Nicaragua is soaring – up fourfold since 2000.

    I can’t say my trip to Nicaragua yielded a hot stock tip or big investment insight. But I learned a lot about a part of the world I hadn’t explored before. Hopefully, my notes here help you see the opportunities that are out there in this great big world – if only we look at it with fresh eyes.

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • The “China Story” is Not Dead Yet

    The city of Harbin lies on the banks of the Songhua River in the northeast of China, in what was Manchuria. This 10th largest city in China is a good place to see how some of the best opportunities in the next phase of China’s expansion come together. In particular, there are huge profits sitting out there in the expansion of China’s rail and subway systems.

    But first, a little context…

    Located near Siberia, Harbin is the most Russian of all Chinese cities. The skyline’s onion domes and spires evoke St. Petersburg or Moscow. At one time, Harbin was home to the largest Russian enclave outside of Moscow.

    Today, it is a key rail hub and inland port like Chicago or Kansas City in the US. Harbin is the largest inland port in the northeast. Five major railways also converge here. They carry crops farmed from the black earth of Harbin and the surrounding countryside. The soil here is among the best in China, nutrient rich and fertile.

    Harbin is also an industrial city making all kinds of things. It may be best known for its power equipment. Harbin alone has cranked out about one-third of all the installed capacity of hydro and thermal power in China.

    It’s this confluence of rail, light industry and agriculture that makes Harbin emblematic of some of the most exciting and promising new opportunities in China. Let’s look at the rail network.

    Trains, like cars or aircraft, need lots of parts. They need a whole mess of stuff from motors to signaling equipment. China’s market for rail components is booming. That’s because the Chinese are laying track at a pace that would’ve made Cornelius Vanderbilt proud. The Financial Times reports that there are plans to lay nearly 19,000 miles of track over the next five years.

    At that pace, China will overtake Russia as the world’s second largest rail infrastructure. Only the US will be bigger. These railroads will creak and groan under the weight of rail cars loaded with grains as well as coal from China’s hinterlands and Mongolia. Harbin is in the middle of it all.

    China’s market for rail components will grow fivefold in the next three years, to more than $50 billion, according to estimates by McKinsey. In 2010, more than half of all the money spent on rail equipment in the world will be spent in China.

    It’s not just railroads; China’s subway market is already the largest in the world, too. There are currently 10 cities that run 31 subway lines of more than 500 miles. In December, the Chinese government approved 22 new subway lines that will cost at least $129 billion to build.

    The growth in this sector is simply staggering. By the end of 2010 alone, China will have 53 subway lines totaling more than 1,000 miles in length and requiring over 6,000 cars. In the next five years, China will add another 600-plus miles to the system, bringing the total number of systems to nearly 90.

    So the opportunity for the makers of rail components is obvious. There is an added wrinkle here, though. The Chinese government mandates that 70% of the components have to be produced by Chinese companies. Therefore, the biggest beneficiaries will be you-know-who.

    The Chinese rail outfitters are already tough international competitors. They are the low-cost providers. They are also becoming world-renowned for their rail exploits. The Chinese, after all, finally conquered the great permafrost on the road to Lhasa, Tibet.

    China’s companies are also competing effectively abroad, bidding on work in South America and the Middle East. The main constraint is capacity. Their home market is giving them everything they can handle. It should stay hot for the next few years, at least.

    In any event, the best way to get a piece of the action is to buy a Chinese company that makes the stuff the railroads and subways need.

    Hearing the phrase “buying a Chinese company,” an investor might wince. Investing in China sounds risky, but I wonder how risky it really is and compared with what. The US, for instance, is hardly a safe haven anymore. The line that separates the US and Europe from emerging markets like China may be less than is supposed, at least from an investor’s viewpoint.

    All this is to say don’t let your prejudices blind you to opportunities in so-called emerging markets. Most people still have little idea of just how big the so-called emerging markets have become.

    Marko Dimitrijevic, who runs Everest Capital, pointed out in a recent Barron’s interview: “The BRIC countries [Brazil, Russia, India and China] are larger than developed Europe. But strikingly to us, the other emerging markets, the non-BRICs, are now larger than US or developed Europe.”

    Even though emerging markets have been growing fast for years, these facts seem to have snuck up on us. A good analogy might be the old bit about the lily pads on a pond that double their population every day. One day, the pond is half full of lilies. The very next day, lilies cover the whole pond.

    The biggest emerging market of all is China. I liked what Eric Kraus, the astute observer and Moscow-based money manager writes about China in his latest letter. He says he is “now almost embarrassed to go on about the secular rise of China – we would not bother were this not the single greatest economic and geopolitical shift of our lifetimes…”

    Admittedly, China has its own problems, and it will have dramatic ups and downs. But China in 2010 is something like the US in 1910. It has lots of room to grow.

    Some of the cheapest stocks in today’s market are the US-listed securities of China-based companies. It’s here you can pick up stocks in good companies, with strong balance sheets and owner-operators, growing 25%-plus a year for less than 10 times earnings.

    I recently alerted the subscribers of Capital & Crisis to a Chinese company that has the inside track on those metro trains and freight cars. In fact, it’s the only Chinese company to have met international standards – and at half of the cost of imports from the competition. It is in prime position to be the vendor of choice in China. In fact, its equipment is so good, it is the only Chinese company exporting to blue chip US companies.

    This world-class company is just one example of a “China Story” that is just getting started. But please bear in mind that the investment road ahead in China will not be smooth. Chinese stocks will certainly subject investors to gut-wrenching volatility. But that’s just the price of admission to the “single greatest economic and geopolitical shift of our lifetimes.”

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • The Chinese Gold Rush

    While in Beijing last week, I visited the Cai Bai gold market. China is the largest buyer of gold in the world…and becoming larger by the day.

    Anecdotally, I can tell you the Cai Bai gold market was bustling with people. (I wish I could show you, but a guard promptly stopped me when I pulled out my video camera.) I was there in the middle of the day, and there was a good crowd of people buying gold in all its forms – from jewelry to bars.

    The numbers coming out of China back that street-level view. May is a peak gold-buying season in China, as it is a popular time for weddings. Even so, gold sales are up over 70% year-over-year, and the sale of gold bars has doubled from a year ago, according to CCTV, the large state Chinese television station.

    The surging demand may be the result of Chinese investors shifting their focus from real estate to gold. This is a snippet from CCTV’s report, which gives you a peek into what is starting to happen:

    “Housing speculators from Wenzhou City in southeastern China are switching their money from property into gold following government restrictions on the real estate market.

    “Tao Xingyi, president of Beijing-based Jinding Group, a company specializing in high-end gold trading and investment, said the company’s customers have increased by 300-400% recently…

    “Tao said that within one month, three groups of Wenzhou investors made purchases of gold from his company worth more than 10 million yuan (about $1.5 million).”

    We often heard on our trip that the Chinese buy empty apartments and just sit on them, treating the investment as a store of value. Their other favorite place to park cash is gold.

    So this transition from real estate to gold is potentially a very big story, if such actions become common across China. That’s a lot of buyers coming to the market. It’s a story we heard more than once on our trip.

    While in China, I met with Patrick Chovanec, a professor at Tsinghua University in Beijing. We dined one night at a 500-year-old restaurant in town, amid a striking interior made up of thick wood beams and traditional Chinese woodwork. In addition to his professorial duties, Chovanec advises hedge funds and investors in China.

    Chovanec is an expat and writes a blog called An American Perspective From China. Commenting on CCTV’s gold story, he wrote:

    “I find it very interesting given the analogy I’ve always drawn between the way Chinese invest in empty apartments as a ‘store of value’ and investment in nonproductive assets like gold. So it might very well make sense that, if they are no longer so certain stockpiled real estate will act as a reliable store of value, they would opt for gold as an attractive alternative.”

    This dramatic surge in Chinese gold demand is just one more trend in the yellow metal’s favor. When you consider that robust Chinese gold- buying is occurring in the context of volatile currency markets and deteriorating government finances in the Developed World, it is easy to imagine a much higher gold price.

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • Fear Is Cheap

    Fear gives intelligence to fools, says an old proverb. Turning it around a bit, we might say that lack of fear makes fools of wise men.

    In the market, fear – or lack of same – finds expression in many forms. The Volatility Index, or VIX, is one of them. Known as the “fear gauge,” the VIX bounces up and down based on what people are paying for options on the S&P 500.

    For example, if people are fearful, they tend to buy put options. Put options are like insurance against a fall in price. They pay off if the market falls. When investors pile into put options, they make the price of such options rise, and that pushes the VIX up, too.

    Conversely, when people are not worried, they sell those options – or at least they don’t buy them. So the price falls, and so does the VIX. There has been a lot of that going on in the last year. The VIX recently hit its lowest point in 30 months, as shown by the nearby chart.

    VIX Spikes Above 20

    Fear looks cheap. Given all that is going on in the world, it is remarkable to find investors so complacent. The financial system is still a rather creaky affair. Leverage is still high. Banks remain undercapitalized. The credit cycle has not yet run its full course, as there are still significant credit losses hiding in the cupboards of banks.

    Then there are the governments of the world. The US has awful credit metrics. It is bleeding money and owes huge debts. Most of the 50 states are also bleeding money and have large debts, including giant gaps in unfunded pension liabilities. They are perhaps worse off, because unlike the US government, the states cannot print their own money. Then there is the EU. And Japan.

    There are only a few ways to cure such ills, and none are painless. One thing is for sure: These ills can’t go on forever.

    In the context of all this, fear looks cheap.

    Conveniently, Wall Street has made fear a tradable commodity. One way to play it is through the iPath S&P 500 VIX Short-Term Futures fund. Though a mouthful, it simply aims to mimic the VIX. It trades under the ticker VXX, and started trading only this year. It’s done horribly, as you would expect given the fall in the VIX.

    Yet it could be a nice play should we have another spike in the VIX. If fear should rear its head again, as it undoubtedly will, the VXX ought to prove nice insurance. More than just insurance, it could return three or four times your money, depending on the spike.

    Fear is cheap. Buy some before the price goes up.

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • We Are Our Own Worst Enemy

    Ken Heebner’s CGM Focus Fund was the best US stock fund of the past decade. It rose 18% a year, beating its nearest rival by more than three percentage points. Yet according to research by Morningstar, the typical investor in the fund lost 11% annually! How can that happen?

    It happened because investors tended to take money out after a bad stretch and put it back in after a strong run. They sold low and bought high. Stories like this blow me away. Incredibly, these investors owned the best fund you could own over the last 10 years – and still managed to lose money.

    Psychologically, it’s hard to do the right thing in investing, which often requires you to buy what has not done well of late so that you will do well in the future. We’re hard-wired to do the opposite.

    I recently read James Montier’s Value Investing: Tools and Techniques for Intelligent Investment. It’s a meaty book that compiles a lot of research. Much of it shows how we are our own worst enemy.

    One of my favorite chapters is called “Confused Contrarians and Dark Days for Deep Value.” Put simply, the main idea is that you can’t expect to outperform as an investor all the time. In fact, the best investors often underperform over short periods of time. Montier cites research by the Brandes Institute that shows how, in any three-year period, the best investors find themselves among the worst performers about 40% of the time!

    It seems strange. Great chefs don’t cook bad meals, but the best investors routinely make a hash of things. Shocking as it may seem at first, it makes sense in the context of markets. “If everyone else is dashing around trying to guess next quarter’s earnings numbers,” Montier writes, “and you are exploiting a long-term time frame, then you may well find yourself staring at the wrong end of a bout of underperformance.”

    The point being you can’t worry too much about short-term performance. Investing is a game won by determined turtles, not hares. That means you have to stick with solid ideas, instead of trying to catch what the hottest thing is.

    Another chapter I like is “Keep It Simple, Stupid.” It illustrates another key point about the nature of investing: It pays to focus on a handful of essential details and ignore the rest. Montier shows us experiments in which people made worse decisions when given more information. For example, in one instance, researchers asked people to choose the best of four cars given only four pieces of information on each car. (In the examples, one car is noticeably and objectively better than the others.) People picked the best car 75% of the time. When given 12 pieces of information, their accuracy dropped to only 25%. The added information was more than just extraneous; it made their choices worse.

    In the context of investing in stocks, it’s better to focus in on key variables that clearly matter and ignore the rest. My investment process aims to do that by boiling down the many details of investing in a company into four major areas. Too many details spoil the broth, but most investors haven’t learned this. “Our industry is obsessed with the minutia of detail,” Montier writes.

    I certainly would agree. I read quite a bit of investment research in any given year and I am always amused at the detailed modeling (and forecasting) that goes on. If an idea depends on such finely tuned analysis, then odds are it is not such a great deal.

    Throughout the book, Montier reveals and validates many ideas essential to smart investing. He also quotes liberally from scores of investing luminaries from Benjamin Graham to Sir John Templeton. There is a lot of wisdom here. Though repetitive at times, digesting these ideas is like eating your vegetables. They keep your portfolio healthy.

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • Water Too Cheap in US and Global Stock Markets

    Water is too cheap in the US…and it is also too cheap in the global stock markets. These are the main thoughts I took away from the Gabelli Water Investment Summit in New York earlier this year.

    The most eye-opening presentation was by Nick DeBenedictis, the CEO of Aqua America, which is the second largest investor-owned water utility in the country. (It trades on the NYSE under the ticker WTR.) DeBenedictis told us about a city that “wondered why it couldn’t put fires out anymore.” The reason was the pipes were so old and clogged that there was only two inches for water flow. You’re never going to get enough water flow out of a pipe that size to put out a fire. “That’s not even enough to take a shower,” DeBenedictis said.

    Speaking of showers, DeBenedictis told us about another water system where people wondered why they couldn’t take a shower and wash the dishes at the same time. Again, an old dilapidated water system was the culprit. “This is Middle America,” he said. “It can’t afford the pension for the police, much less new pipes.”

    When a water system gets bad enough and the public finances strained enough, then a city will look to sell it. Sometimes, it is so bad and has so many problems that the municipality will sell it at any price. “We’ve picked up some for $1,” DeBenedictis said. “They just wanted to give it away.”

    Or as Don Correll, CEO of American Water Works (the largest investor- owned utility in the US) put it, “We’re seeing financial distress in municipalities today that we’ve never seen in our lifetime… The more we keep printing money and running deficits, the more we’ll turn toward private investment.” That means more opportunities for the investor- owned water utilities.

    Water is still too cheap in America. We subsidize water and hold it to an artificially low price. Most people pay a fraction for water compared with what they pay to an electric or telephone utility. But based on what I see and hear about the quality of our water systems, we’re going to have to pay up soon. As the Dennis Doll, CEO of Middlesex Water Co. said, “Many of these systems are disasters waiting to happen.”

    Global Water Prices

    It’s also going to affect us in ways you may not think of. It’s more than just the health and safety of our drinking water and the care of our wastewater – though that ought to be reason enough for concern. Our water supply will also dictate our choice of energy sources. (It takes water to make energy and energy to make water. This area of overlap is known as the energy-water nexus. It will be much more important in the 21st century than ever before.)

    For instance, the renewable biofuels targets put out by the US Department of Energy are “completely dependent upon water supplies that simply do not exist at this point,” according to Summit. California’s goal of producing 1 billion gallons of ethanol per year, for example, will consume 2.5 trillion gallons of water. That’s more than “all the water from the Sacramento River Delta that currently goes to Southern California and Central Valley farmers combined.”

    So what does all this mean for an investor? The water utilities look interesting again. Some are starting to enjoy rate increases. I like SJW Corp., a stock I recommended a few years ago. It’s now back below the price where I originally recommended it. SJW owns excess land and trades below its takeover value. Another good one is Aqua America, as the stock has not rallied much from the bottom and it has many opportunities to grow. Both stocks pay decent dividends.

    The other stocks I’m following in this space are the many industrials that make the pipes, pumps, valves and other goods that support water. This has been a good place to fish for stocks. As Summit’s research over the last 30 years shows, “These businesses have tended to outperform other industrial sectors.”

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • Water Supply of America is Becoming Unreliable

    The city of Milwaukee is starting to figure out it has a great resource in its backyard – access to the fresh water of Lake Michigan.

    The history of Milwaukee is a history of that plentiful water supply. Water-intensive businesses such as breweries and tanneries flourished here. They helped build this city on the shores of Lake Michigan. By the early 20th century, Milwaukee was the nation’s chief brewer. Pabst, Miller, Schlitz and Blatz – they all called Milwaukee home.

    Things topped out in 1960, and since then, Milwaukee’s population has been in decline. The tanneries left. The big breweries are gone. What remains, though, is the water system. Pipes, tanks, pumping stations, treatment plants… Today, it runs at only a third of its capacity.

    So the city plans to use this as a lure for so-called “wet businesses,” or businesses that use a lot of water. Come to Milwaukee and it’ll give you a break on water rates for up to five years. The city is not alone. Erie, Pa., has been offering Lake Erie water at 40% off for businesses that relocate there.

    The fact that Milwaukee and Erie can do this at all tells you something about America’s water supply. It is – or is in the process of becoming – unreliable. I’ve written about this unfolding water crisis for years, and it always interests me. I think water will be one of the most important investment themes over the next decade, at least.

    So when offered a spot at the Gabelli Water Investment Summit in New York, I duly took it. The folks at Gabelli do a good job of bringing together a dozen or so executives of water companies from around the country. It’s a worthwhile day, and I always learn something. I also can’t help but come away thinking bad thoughts about the way the US runs it water supply.

    The most eye-opening presentation was by Nick DeBenedictis, the CEO of Aqua America, which is the second largest investor-owned water utility in the country. (It trades on the NYSE under the ticker WTR.)

    He gave a good overview of the water utility industry. In a word, I’d have to say “messy” is an apt way to think of it. As DeBenedictis said, “You would never design it this way.” First, there are way too many systems. We have 55,000 water systems in this country. Second, most are too small, serving fewer than 3,000 people. The whole thing is inefficient, like trying to sled uphill.

    But for whatever reasons, most people in this country think access to water is some kind of right and that we shouldn’t charge a market price for water. So market forces have not shaped the water industry as much as they might have. In the US, the government runs most of these systems. Only about 10% of the population gets its water from a private entity such as Aqua America.

    In other parts of the world, the story is different. In England, 100% of the people get their water from private sources, and they have just 10 water systems. Even in France, 90% of the people get their water from private companies. In the US, we let government officials run amok. It was not always so. In 1850, about 80% of the country got its water from private companies. By 1900, it was 50%. So we’ve taken decades to get where we are today. Where we are today is an expensive place to be.

    Summit Asset Management recently put out a white paper, The Case for Water Equity Investing 2010. (It’s available free on the Web and is well worth the read for the broad overview it gives.) In the paper, the authors sum up the damage. “In the US alone, the network of drinking water pipes extends almost a million miles – more than four times the length of the National Highway System. This aging infrastructure, much of which is more than 100 years old, has long exceeded its useful life and in many areas is in a state of utter disrepair.”

    To fix it will cost at least $500 billion over the next 20 years. That’s a lot of new pipes, treatment plants, security upgrades and more. I bet it costs twice that. These projects always cost more when you start digging and pulling stuff out of the ground.

    You would be appalled at the pictures of government-run water systems, which look like something out of the old Soviet Union. Dirty, old, rusted plants…water pipes filled with crud and buildup…little outhouse-like structures with no security that tap right into the drinking water supply…

    “Cities around the country are playing the game of pay me later,” DeBenedictis says. “Leave it for the next mayor.” That’s always the problem. Who wants to be the politician to raise water rates to pay for needed repairs and maintenance?

    And so the systems plunge deeper into decrepitude. The city does nothing until it has to. But the day of reckoning has arrived!

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • Griffon Corp, a Very Rugged Cockroach

    The lowly cockroach has a tough chin. It’s survived all kinds of shocks over the years. Jungles gave way to deserts. Flatlands succumbed to urban habitats. Predators came and went over many millennia. Yet there the cockroach stood, undaunted upon its six spindly legs.

    Investors could learn a few things from the cockroach.

    For one, the cockroach teaches a great lesson in survival. As author Richard Bookstaber points out: “Its defense mechanism is limited to moving away from slight puffs of air, puffs that might signal an approaching predator.”

    So simple and so crude – yet so very effective. The cockroach is hard to kill and fit for any environment. In markets, we also have cockroaches. One of the types would be the holding company with lots of cash, little debt and a few different businesses in its charge. These things are hard to kill. They have also often done quite well for investors over their long histories, as Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.A), ITT (NYSE:ITT), Loews Corp (NYSE:L), Seaboard (AMEX:SEB) and others have shown.

    One up-and-comer that has caught my attention is Griffon Corp (NYSE:GFF). The company operates in three different business lines: radars, plastics and garage doors. Let’s look at each of these businesses. Then we’ll see how we can pick up shares today for a deep discount to the value of the sum of its parts.

    “Telephonics” is Griffon’s radar and communications business. It makes, for example, weather radar and search radar for military and civilian applications. It also makes air traffic control systems. It has its talons deep in the market, and you can find Griffon systems on all manner of military aircraft – everything from the C-130 Hercules to the AH-64A Apache helicopter. Its biggest customer is the US military. But it also counts Boeing, Lockheed Martin and the like as customers.

    It’s a good business with a bright future. The trend toward more surveillance of borders, for example, increases demand for Griffon products. Ditto the trend toward more unmanned aircraft. The technology is also adaptable to civilian applications. Griffon has built, for example, 20 air traffic control systems in China over the last 20 years. And there are more requests for proposals out there, including a big one in Hong Kong.

    This is the best of the three businesses, in my view, and one that ought to be able to grow in low double digits even in a challenging economic environment. The second business is called Clopay Plastics. This operation makes films and plastics used in diapers and a variety of medical and industrial uses. Procter & Gamble is a big customer, along with Kimberly-Clark, 3M and Johnson & Johnson. Clopay Plastics is a good business – profitable, steady and entrenched.

    The last business is Clopay Building Products, which essentially makes garage doors. As you know what’s happened to the housing market, I probably don’t need to tell you what happened here. This business has been losing money. However, management has done a good job turning this business around. It closed plants. It got rid of the installation business. As a result, it actually eked out an operating profit last quarter.

    This brings up why I think this stock is a buy now. Griffon is in the midst of a big turnaround, one that is already taking shape. New management came in last year when Ron Kramer became CEO. He was the president of Wynn Resorts and before that a managing director at investment banking firm Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein. He’s brought in a new CFO, the former CFO of International Flavor and Fragrances. He also brought in a new accounting guy from Dover Corp. and new tax guy from Citi. The team is loaded with acquisition-related and strategic experience. One of their top priorities is to put Griffon’s balance sheet to work.

    And they’ve got a lot to play with here. Griffon has lots of cash to do a deal – $320 million in cash against only $180 million in debt. On the most recent conference call, Kramer says they’ve passed on a lot of deals. But this is one way this team could create value, by picking up an asset on the cheap in this market.

    Until then, the turnaround continues apace. As Kramer pointed out on a recent conference call: “We are confident that each business is now positioned to operate well even if conditions remain challenging. In the year ahead, we believe that each business will generate significant growth and operating profits and continue to generate cash.” I believe him, but the stock market doesn’t.

    On the conference call, Kramer remarked, “It is clear that at least for the moment investors seem to think that Griffon is worth something decidedly less than what we believe the businesses to be worth.” The market is still looking backward on Griffon, on the trends of the past four years, as earnings per share fell from $1.65 per share to 39 cents in the fiscal year just ended, Sept. 30, 2009.

    At $13.15 a share, Griffon trades for slightly more than its book value of $11.50 per share. For fiscal year 2009, it generated $50 million in free cash flow in what was clearly a transitional year. Nonetheless, the stock goes for only 15 times that depressed free cash flow number. I would estimate a private buyer would pay around $18 per share on a sum-of-the-parts basis, as is. Better results as the turnaround continues will up that number significantly.

    Finally, officers and directors, a group of 16 people, own 28% of the stock. They have every incentive to unlock the value that they clearly see. In this highly fragile economy, I’ll take the cockroaches of the investment world.

    Griffon is a very rugged cockroach.

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • Titanium Metals (NYSE:TIE): Investing in Aviation Growth

    The economic center of gravity will not always reside in the United States. In fact, it’s already in the process of shifting from the US to Asia and the Middle East. Forward-looking investors cannot afford to ignore this trend.

    One of my favorite ways to invest in the rapidly growing emerging markets is through the back door, so to speak. Invest in companies, wherever they are, that have what these economies need or want, but don’t have. Airliner production is a classic example.

    I bet most Americans would be surprised to learn, for example, that the Middle East is a very important market for new jets. The Gulf’s leading airlines – Emirates (out of Dubai), Etihad (out of Abu Dhabi) and Qatar Airways have become big reasons why Boeing and Airbus make any money. “The Middle East is still the hub of aviation growth,” says Airbus CEO, Tom Enders.

    According to informed guesses, the Middle East will buy 1,400-1,700 planes over the next twenty years, at a cost of $240-300 billion. These planes will support passenger growth of nearly 5% annually over that timeframe. Many other developing nations around the globe are also becoming active buyers of passenger jets. Airbus just signed a $1.8 billion deal with Vietnam Airlines for four A380 super-jumbos and two A350s. Ethiopian Airlines recently put in an order for 12 A350s, at a cost of $3 billion. These are just two examples.

    The Asia-Pacific region, despite the impressive growth out of the Middle East, is still the largest buyer of aircraft. Over the next 20 years, for instance, the Asia-Pacific region will require close to 9,000 planes, at a cost of over $1 trillion.

    I’ve focused mostly on civil aviation. But there is also defense spending. In the Middle East, defense spending will probably rise to more than $100 billion by 2014, from only $36 billion now, according to a new study by consultancy Frost & Sullivan. That’s why Lockheed Martin recently announced it would double its capacity to produce the C-130 Super Hercules – because of increased demand from the Middle East.

    Also, I can’t end without saying a word about the world’s urge to lower carbon emissions. The industry has pledged to cut its carbon emissions in half by 2050 – an effort that will require new planes with lighter material, different design and innovative engines.

    Despite all the good news on the aviation front, there is a fly in the soup that Boeing and Airbus will have to fish out before long: They are having a hard time making the planes on time. This is a rather fascinating subject on its own, given the history of aviation. In 1944, for example, Boeing used to crank out 16 B-17 bombers every 24 hours. Today, it’s having a hard time producing one of its ballyhooed Dreamliners after more than two years of trying. Airbus has had its share of delays as well.

    Eventually, they’ll sort it out. Eventually, they will build the new planes. There are lots of ways to play on these ideas as an investor, as these new planes ripple through the supply chain.

    My favorites are the titanium producers. Titanium is a lightweight metal. In fact, it has the highest strength-to-weight ratio of any metal, making it ideal for aircraft. The newer planes are titanium intensive, more so than in the past.

    Our play here is Titanium Metals (NYSE:TIE), the second-largest producer of titanium in the world. It has a solid financial position with lots of cash and no debt. It’s stayed profitable, even through the slump. And Wall Street doesn’t expect much from it, as analysts rate the stock as a poor performer. The potential upside when it comes makes it worth hanging onto. In TIE’s heyday back in 2006, it was a $40 stock. Today, it’s about $13. All cycles turn, remember. And this one will, too. The company only recently signed a new agreement with Boeing that will keep it as a key supplier through 2015.

    Titanium Metals has the potential to be a big winner once the aviation cycle gets in full swing again.

    Regards,

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • Emerging Markets Are Still a Buy

    Oranges were once expensive luxuries in northern climes. “In 1916,” Paul Fussell writes in Abroad, “oranges, like other exotic things that had to travel by sea, were excessively rare in England. If you could find them at all, they cost the shocking sum of 5d each.”

    Today, we take for granted that we can eat apples and oranges and bananas all year round if we choose. It doesn’t matter where you live. We can eat strawberries in the dead of winter. In fact, we routinely enjoy goods that come from places very far from our own doorstep.

    “Televisions from Taiwan, lettuce from Mexico, shirts from China,” William Bernstein writes in A Splendid Exchange, a book on trade. Goods from faraway are so common, “it is easy to forget how recent such miracles of commerce are.”

    Such miracles of commerce have redrawn the economic map. The emerging markets have “emerged,” as you will see. For you and me a big opportunity has also emerged in something called the Great Convergence.

    Our story has its roots in the late 20th century, with the gradual spread of the Industrial Revolution to the developing world. According to Power & Plenty, a good reference book on trade, the Western world (ex-Japan) represented 90% of the world’s manufacturing output as late as 1953. America’s economy alone was nearly half of the world’s industrial output.

    During this time, the economic gap between, say, China and Western Europe grew very wide when viewed in historic terms. But things changed in the late 20th century. The Great Convergence began. From 1950 on, world economic growth was, according to Power & Plenty, “quite simply astonishing.” We enjoyed a rolling wave of “economic miracles” through the decades. Closed economies opened up…and trade expanded.

    We can point to the success of postwar Japan…and then to the surging tiger economies of East Asia. Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan and South Korea grew in leaps and bounds. Finally, we saw the opening up of China, India, Russia and Brazil. The once-bottled-up energies of these countries poured out.

    Today, we see the handiwork of the Great Convergence taking shape. The distinctions between “emerging markets” and “developed markets” are starting to disappear. Indeed, the terms may already be obsolete. Such is exactly the thesis of Everest Capital, which makes the case in a recent white paper called The End of Emerging Markets?

    “The belief that companies in the US, Western Europe or Japan are better managed than in emerging markets is also no longer valid,” Everest asserts. “Anyone who has sat through the parade of fraud and corporate malfeasance of recent years in the US will find it hard to argue otherwise.”

    The list of corporate thieves is much longer in the US and Europe than in the emerging markets. Management teams in the West no longer dominate when it comes to standards of best practices. Everest speaks with the authority of a practitioner on this point. “We meet a large number of managements in emerging market countries, and it is impressive to see how quickly they have adopted best practices in terms of disclosure, governance and creating shareholder value.”

    Everest also makes the case that governments in the West are just as bumbling as those of emerging markets. More and more, it is the Western governments that steal too much. Another distinction blurred.

    Emerging markets now make up about half of the global economy. Take a look at the nearby chart, “Let’s Call It Even.” (Gross domestic product is a flawed statistic, but it serves as a rough guess of economic size. PPP means “purchasing power parity,” which aims to take out the distorting effect of different currencies.)

    Global GDP

    Not surprisingly, therefore, emerging markets now make up 10 of the 20 largest economies in the world. India is now bigger than Germany. Russia is bigger than the UK. Mexico is bigger than Canada. Turkey is bigger than Australia.

    Large Emerging Market Economies

    In a stock market sense, these places have also grown up. It used to be that emerging markets were not very liquid or very big. It was not that long ago that the IBM shares changing hands in a single day in New York were worth more than all the shares that traded hands in Shanghai or Bombay.

    Today’s emerging markets are large and liquid. As Everest Capital points out: “In the third quarter of this year, Chinese markets traded more shares than the NYSE; Hong Kong and Korea traded more than Germany; India traded more than France; and Taiwan traded more than Italy, Australia or Canada.”

    Emerging market companies are also growing faster. In particular, there are wide gaps in the growth rates of sales and profits. The second key distinction worth noting is that of balance sheet strength. Emerging market companies have less debt and cover their debts more comfortably.

    All is to say, investors need exposure to emerging markets, or at the very least, they should not shun them for reasons that are no longer valid. One of my favorite ways to get exposure to emerging markets is through the back door, so to speak. Invest in companies, wherever they are, that have what these economies need or want, but don’t have – or can’t make. This is another reason to invest in the commodities we’ve honed in on – especially oil, potash, gold and the agricultural commodities.

    Regards,

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • My Favorite Energy Plays: Geothermal and Nuclear

    Last month, I traveled halfway around the world to Australia and New Zealand while researching one of my favorite investment themes: the growing scarcity of resources like water, farmland, and energy.

    One of the highlights of my trip was taking a group of subscribers to visit one of the world’s best resource investors – Rick Rule – at his farm outside of Auckland, New Zealand. After eating lunch, we got down to the business of the market.

    Rule expects markets will be extremely volatile this year, which he considers a gift. It’s what allows you to pick up assets on the cheap. Specifically, assets in his favorite sector, natural resources.

    There are simple reasons why Rule likes resources: For a long period of time, very little new investment occurred in most resource industries. So now they are playing catch-up. From 1982-2000, there was no net investment in the resource sector, Rule maintains. These industries require continuous investment because they are, by definition, self- depleting. If you run a mine, for example, every day you run it, the deposit gets smaller.

    At the same time, global demand for resources has been booming. “When Indonesians make a little extra money, they buy stuff,” Rule explains simply. “They upgrade from bicycles to cars. They buy air conditioners for the first time. They buy refrigerators.” All of these things use basic materials – steel, aluminum, and other metals. They use energy.

    Rule sums it up this way: “When we Americans spend money, we buy services. When poor people spend money, they buy stuff.” He points out China uses only 3% as much oil as the US on a per capita basis. Therefore, if Chinese oil demand were to rise only to the level of South Korea on a per capita basis, which is 16% that of the US, then China’s incremental oil demand would account for all of current world production.

    Not surprisingly, Rule’s favorite sector in the resource sector is energy. “Energy is cheap, and it’s not going to stay cheap. Natural gas is the same price as it was in 1980 on inflation-adjusted terms.”

    Demand is going up and supply is problematic. Rule points out that most of the oil in the world is produced by national oil companies (NOCs), like those of Venezuela, Peru, Iran, Mexico, and Indonesia – not by the ExxonMobils and Chevrons of the world. These NOCs are starving themselves of much-needed reinvestment so that they can spend the proceeds on social programs or to advance political objectives. Many of these countries are on the verge of halting oil exports, simply because local demand is close to consuming all the local oil production.

    Another factor in favor of rising energy prices is “carbon hysteria.” Skirting the issue of whether global warming is real or not, there are consequences to the current drive to reduce carbon emissions. For instance, “coal is bad” has become the pervasive governmental point of view. So if you found a bunch of coal in Australia or New Zealand and wanted to develop it, Rule says, you probably couldn’t. Governments hate coal, despite the fact that most of the world still relies on coal.

    So what does Rule like here? His favorites are geothermal and uranium.

    “I really like geothermal,” he says. And the US is one of the best places in the world to develop geothermal reservoirs into power-generation facilities. Political consensus in the US is that geothermal is good. Power companies want it and are willing to pay up for it because it’s “green.” Political subsidies make the economics of geothermal even more compelling. Rule maintains you can earn a 22% internal rate of return with a cost of capital less than 5%. These are far better returns than solar or wind projects generate.

    “I can’t say when geothermal stock will take off,” Rule said. “But the businesses work stupidly well. They really work. It almost doesn’t matter what stock you buy, just own the sector.” Rule reeled off four names to own – Ram Power, Nevada Geothermal, Sierra Geothermal, and US Geothermal.

    They are speculative little ventures, but owning a basket is probably a good move. As for the speculative nature of the stocks, Rule said the best stock he ever owned was an Australian penny stock. “I bought it for 1.5 cents per share and sold it for $10 per share,” he said. “It was the best stock of my life.”

    He also likes uranium. Uranium had a mania and then the price collapsed, and the stocks with it, but the businesses kept getting better and better. “The uranium story that fed the mania is still in place.” Rule said we consume more uranium than we produce. “The uranium price has to go up. And more importantly, it can go up.” Meaning, the price of uranium is very low. It could double and still not have any meaningful impact on the economics of a nuclear plant. “People don’t care much about uranium today, but in three years, they are going to care a lot.”

    Rule’s favorite themes are much the same as mine. As I explained in the January 27th edition of The Daily Reckoning, I’m a big fan of buying mid-sized oil and gas stocks right now because, like Rule, I believe oil and natural gas prices are going to be higher three years from now. But I’m also digging into other energy sectors like geothermal and nuclear.

    I am persuaded by Rule’s analysis.

    Regards,

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • To Design a Poor Investor, Look No Further Than the Typical Mutual Fund

    Ninety-seven percent of all stock mutual funds are down from where they stood at the beginning of 2008. If you are surprised by this not-so- trivial piece of trivia, you shouldn’t be. Very few mutual fund managers actually manage their funds in a way that could produce meaningful outperformance. So if it’s outperformance you want, you’ll probably have to do it yourself.

    According to Morningstar, the average stock fund rose 35% last year… But that wasn’t nearly enough to overcome the 41% loss the year before. Only six funds achieved double-digit returns across the two-year span. And only two – two! – US equity funds have produced an annualized return greater than 10% during the last three years.

    I’ve long held that mutual funds are full of bad habits, like a boy who can’t stop picking his nose or burping at the dinner table. If you had to design a poor investor, you would need look no further than the typical mutual fund. For example, the typical mutual fund turns over its entire portfolio at least once per year and owns 160 stocks. These are two things that often lead to mediocrity: too much trading and too many stocks.

    All that churning fattens the brokers of the funds. And the mutual funds often have unseemly arrangements to direct commissions to brokers who help market the funds. Owning all those stocks also means the fund managers often know little about what they own. No individual stock matters much, nor does any single issue make much of a difference, so why bother looking at any of them in detail? It is little wonder the typical mutual fund produces such an indifferent result.

    So I believe you’re much better off buying a small basket of stocks that meet my four basic criteria: priced cheap, in good financial shape, with a business model that’s easy to understand, run by managers who own a good chunk of shares themselves.

    One of the best ways to find stocks exactly like these is to comb through 13-D filings – which is a bit like panning for gold. The process is very time-consuming and the payoffs are rare. But investors who have the time and aptitude to conduct this sort of research can greatly improve their odds of success…and the magnitude of those successes.

    A 13-D filing occurs whenever an investor buys more than 5% of a public company. This filing, by itself, tells you nothing. You’ve got to do a lot more research to determine the whos and whys of each filing. But when you come across a filing by a known “activist” shareholder, you are usually onto something worthwhile.

    Yankees slugger Reggie Jackson once described himself as “the straw that stirs the drink.” An activist shareholder is kind of like that. Having one of these guys in a stock you own is like having the home run-hitting Reggie Jackson in the middle of your lineup. The game can change in a hurry.

    An activist is someone who takes a big position in a stock with the intention of using that clout to change things. Possible changes might include pushing for a new board of directors or for selling part or all of the company. The idea is to actively unlock value in the shares, rather than sitting back passively and hoping for the best.

    You’ve surely seen the names of high-profile activists in the papers… Bill Ackman, Nelson Peltz, Carl Icahn and many others… Their activist exploits helped make them very wealthy.

    As investors, we can tag along in such efforts because anytime someone buys more than 5% of a company’s stock, he has to file a 13-D with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 10 days of doing so. You can track 13-Ds by trolling around on the SEC’s Web site or by subscribing to a service that tracks them for you. Barron’s and some other publications also highlight 13-D filings on a weekly basis.

    These 13-Ds are great for investors like you and me. They are like little bells that go off alerting us that we should take a look at the stock. We won’t buy all the 13-Ds we come across. But over the course of an investment life, we will find some fat pitches to put over the wall.

    One of the stocks I recommended recently to the subscribers of Mayer’s Special Situations came to my attention by way of a 13-D filing by KSA Capital Management. In that 13-D, KSA disclosed that it owned 14.1% of the company. It bought shares between $33.39-39.18 per share from Oct. 1-Nov. 4. On Nov. 10, KSA’s managing member, Daniel Khoshaba, sent management a letter in which he outlined his case that the stock was dramatically undervalued and that management should put the company up for sale. The stock is AEP Industries (AEPI).

    AEPI is currently trading for about $34 per share – very close to the lowest price KSA paid for its stake. But KSA paid as much as $39.18. Why? Because Khoshaba believes AEPI is worth about $110 per share. Obviously, if Khoshaba’s estimate is in the ballpark, investors could make a sizeable gain buying the stock at the current quote.

    Regards,

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • Buy Oil Stocks… No Matter What

    We really don’t know as much about the oil market as we think we do.

    There are many numbers out there, but most of these involve a lot of guesswork. For example, we really don’t know just how much oil the world will need. The US Department of Energy says we’ll need 106.6 million barrels a day by 2030, but how does it know? It can’t know. The DOE can’t know what the world will look like in 2030.

    We don’t really know how much oil we’re discovering or how much will actually come to the market any time soon. We don’t really know how much it will cost to get this oil.

    We can guess, but our guesses are frequently wrong. Goldman Sachs wrote in a research report issued in February of last year (230 Projects to Change the World) that the cost of bringing on additional oil sands project would come to $80-$90 a barrel. It sounds nice, but it’s a guess.

    We don’t know a lot, even though we put decimal points on lots of numbers as if we knew precisely. And there is plenty of room for people to fudge numbers and make up stuff. It happens all the time.

    Of course, no one knows what the price of oil will be, but there is no shortage of forecasts. Goldman Sachs says it will be $95 by the end of 2010. Deutsche Bank says $65. They are all guessing.

    There is one thing we do know. And fortunately, this is the most important thing to remember as an investor in oil: The market is still pricing proved oil reserves at less than replacement cost.

    In other words, it is cheaper in today’s market to buy proven reserves in the stock market than to drill for new ones.

    I would cite the 2008 reserve and finding cost study published by Howard Weil. It shows the average cost of reserves through the drill bit is about $43 per barrel, with the median (or midpoint) around $25 per barrel. These are hard numbers, not soft guesses. You can do this yourself and find out how much it costs for your favorite oil company to add a barrel of proved oil reserves by drilling for it.

    So we have a good idea of what it costs to create a barrel of proved oil reserves today. Figuring out these numbers is easier than guessing what the price of oil will be in the future. Granted, even these cost numbers will change. There are no constants.

    But here is the trick. You want to buy oil companies when you can pick up proved oil reserves for a lot less than what it costs to produce them. In the market, that’s where we are today. In fact, you can pick up proved reserves for less than $15 a barrel.

    You have lots of companies in which you can buy oil in the ground for under $10 a barrel…and remember it costs an average of $25 a barrel to replace it.

    I could not make a more compelling argument for oil stocks than this.

    Buying for less than replacement costs is one of my main compasses in investing – whether I’m buying potash mines or gold mines or factories or oil rigs or what have you. If I can buy something in the stock market for less than it costs to replace those assets – and as long as I’m not buying buggy whips – then I’ve got a good chance of making money.

    That’s because the stock market is, after all, just a market. Eventually, prices correct. In the oil market, we’ll see more acquisitions. It’s cheaper and easier to grow reserves that way. The buying pressure will lift the price of oil stocks so that the disparity is not so great. Simple as that.

    In the case of oil, we are also looking at strong odds that the costs of producing a barrel of oil reserves will go up. Recently, The Wall Street Journal ran a piece titled, “Cramped on Land, Big Oil Bets at Sea.”

    Now, you’ve probably heard of all the big deep-water oil projects. All the major oil companies are moving farther offshore in their quest for oil. The WSJ article leads with this: “Big Oil never wanted to be here, in 4,300 feet of water far out in the Gulf of Mexico, drilling through nearly five miles of rock. It is an expensive way to look for oil.”

    Yes, it is. This is another of the great unknowns. We don’t know how much it will cost at the end of the day to get this oil. We know that it will cost a lot. Chevron spent $2.7 billion over 10 years on just the first phase of a deep-water oil project in the Gulf.

    That’s one of the more tame projects. Some of the sub-salt discoveries involve drilling more than 30,000 feet. They will be the most expensive wells ever drilled. You really don’t need to know a lot about geology or oil to guess that this deep-water oil is going to be more expensive than the good old oil wells onshore.

    So the average cost of reserves is likely to go higher. Meaning that if you can lock in quality, low-cost, long-lived reserves today for only $15 a barrel or less – you should do it. That’s why you own oil stocks today.

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts:

  • Made in Japan: A New Bull Market

    Japan has now been through a 20-year bear market. Tokyo’s Nikkei – think of it as Japan’s Dow Jones Industrial Average – put in a new low last year. Even though it’s rallied a bit since then, it’s still down about 75% from its all-time high in 1989. That’s a brutal bear market.

    After all that, there is still no shortage of bad news on Japan. There are plenty of problems, including a ballooning pile of government debt. Some think a debt crisis is inevitable.

    Yet even the most ferocious of bear markets eventually ends. So naturally, the question is: Is now – finally – the time to buy Japanese stocks? I’ve come across lots of interesting bits on Japan of late that got me thinking that answer is yes.

    There is James Montier’s new book, Value Investing, which is really just a compilation of stuff he’s written before. Nonetheless, there is enough entertaining and thoughtful research to make it worthwhile. In rereading some of these pieces, I came across Montier’s piece on Ben Graham’s net-nets.

    Graham was an important investment thinker in the history of our craft. He created the idea of a net-net, which is a company that sells for less than its net working capital – current assets minus current liabilities – alone. Meaning, you pay nothing for the company’s fixed assets. It’s a kind of bedrock of value, a figure so low and ridiculous that no one would sell a business for that price. Turns out these are often good investments.

    The problem with net-nets, though, is that they are a kind of financial snow leopard – often sought, seldom seen. But in a September 2008 piece, Montier set out to find today’s net-nets. He found more than half of them in Japan. As he writes, “This clearly suggests Japanese small caps are one of the best sources of bottom-up ideas available.”

    In March 2009, Montier updated his findings and found more net-nets than ever. Again, more than half were in Japan. He called Japanese small caps among “the cheapest assets on earth.”

    Then, too, I remember going to the Grant’s Spring 2009 Investment Conference and listening to Jean-Marie Eveillard give a presentation. Eveillard, if you don’t know, is a revered figure among investors. He is most known as the pilot of the First Eagle funds, for which he began managing money in 1979. The French-born Eveillard, born in 1940, is an old-school value investor. Graham’s legacy inspires Eveillard, as he often mentions him.

    When managing money, Eveillard was known for holding onto quite a bit of cash when he couldn’t find compelling investment ideas – unusual in the mutual fund world, where managers are usually fully invested. And he also invested in gold long before it was popular.

    In Eveillard’s presentation last Spring, he too talked about how cheap Japan’s stock market was. He pointed out that book value was “very hard” in Japan, since many of the assets were in cash. “To say the Japanese stock market trades below book value is to say quite a bit,” Eveillard said. Right now, the Nikkei trades for a price-to-book ratio of about one-to-one.

    Eveillard ran through some examples of companies he liked – Fanuc, SMC, Astellas Pharma and Shimano. These are dominant businesses. Several of these had cash in excess of 50% of their market caps. They traded for only slight premiums to book at a time when the S&P 500 traded for four times book.

    In a November interview with Steve Forbes, Eveillard was still talking about Japan. He said investors were “thoroughly disgusted” with Japan’s market, an environment that creates cheap stocks. He also talked about how Japan’s companies have tons of cash. “Americans used to make fun of them,” he said. “Those idiots are sitting on tons of cash that yield nothing.” Now – after the trials of 2007-08 – many American companies wish they had held onto some cash.

    But Japan’s companies hold too much cash. In general, Eveillard is forgiving of this excessive conservatism and sees it as a potential strength in today’s environment. “Nothing is perfect,” he says, “and that’s a sin which I have been willing to forgive – excess conservatism, as opposed to excess aggressiveness. Today to have a very sound balance sheet is a tremendous advantage. It is one of the strengths that will allow some companies to gain at the expense of other companies burdened with debt.”

    Over the last few years, he has been one of the lonely voices talking about investing in Japan. In fact, I talked to a good friend of mine – of the contrarian bent – who advises pensions and endowments on investing. I asked him if he had any favorites as far as getting exposure to Japan’s stock market. “There really isn’t much out there,” he told me. “It’s not like investors are clamoring to get into Japan.”

    Then there is Bill Bonner, my publisher and editor of The Daily Reckoning. His famous Trade of Decade in 2000 was to buy gold and sell the dollar, a trade that worked out brilliantly. In the early days of 2010, Bonner put on a new Trade of the Decade: Sell US Treasuries and buy Japanese stocks.

    Finally, there is some historical precedent for surprise. Over the holidays, I read Keyes Beech’s book Not Without the Americans. Beech was the dean of Far East correspondents, having worked the beat for over 50 years. His book came out in 1971 and he’s been dead since 1990, but his book gives valuable perspective on Asia’s development.

    If you think things are bad in Japan now, you should take a minute to imagine what it was like in 1945. As Beech writes:

    The country was literally in ruins. Its major cities were leveled by American warplanes. Its industrial plant was either destroyed or obsolete. Its once great merchant fleet lay at the bottom of the sea.

    One expert at the time described Japan as “10 men in a boat with food for seven.” It could hardly be bleaker. Yet within 20 years of its crushing defeat, Japan was the third largest economy in the world, behind only the US and Soviet Union. It was four times bigger than it was before the war. The Economist called it “the most successful sudden economic growth story of all time.”

    Within two decades Japan had the highest growth rate in the world. It made half the world’s ships, produced more steel than Britain and had the second largest auto industry in the world. All of which would have been unimaginable in 1945. And it did all this with nary any natural resources.

    I’m not saying Japan will repeat this miracle. I’m passing on more evidence that the consensus is often wrong and one should expect surprises.

    Bottom line: I wouldn’t count Japan out. And bear markets do end. Twenty years is a long time. I like the new Trade of the Decade. To participate, you have several choices. You can invest in the Japanese Smaller Capitalization Fund, ticker JOF, which has lost a third of its value over the last decade. The iShares MSCI Japan Index Fund, ticker EWJ, has done even worse, but it is another fund that aims to capture the returns of the Japanese market…for better or worse.

    Regards,

    Chris Mayer
    for The Daily Reckoning Australia

    Similar Posts: